g++-3.3.x & g++-2.95.x?

[Simon Barner]

> If I'd like to use it as standard c/c++ compiler for building ports. Will 
> the change in the ABI between gcc-2.95.x and gcc-3.x make things fail 
> unless I rebuild all ports that use C++?

If you decide to use gcc-3.3.3 as your standard ports compiler, I'd
definitively recommend to rebuild all your ports from scratch.

IMO, if you try to rebuild only those C++ ports that have linker
problems, you will end up in an unimaginable mess. It's also a good
occasion to get rid of unnecessary ports ;-)

> I've read somewhere about this, 
> but I can't find it now. Problem would be that the change in the ABI would 
> make old binaries, built with gcc-2.95.x, unable to link with new 
> libraries, built with gcc-3.x.

Yes, because they change the name mangling for (virtual?) methods. Be
it as it may, it's not compatible.

Simon
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20040124/482388cd/attachment.bin