about the gcc 3.4.x problems

[Chuck Swiger]

Dan Nelson wrote:
[ ... ]
> In general, C++ object files are not portable across different gcc releases,
> since they fix ABI bugs in every release.  Code built with 3.4 may not link
> to an old 3.3 libstdc++, thus the dependency on the port's own libstdc++.  I
> don't see a problem here.

I see a problem with C++ object files not being portable from release to 
release, but you're certainly right that it's not a new problem or one 
designed to bedevil Paul Seniura in particular.  :-)

I was going to suggest to Paul that if you run into problems when something 
changes, using cvsup and a date specification to track down the specific 
timeframe when something broke can be quite helpful.  It also means that you 
can update back a few days (um, "backdate"?) to a system which was working 
until the problem gets fixed.  However, I don't know whether CTM or whatever 
it was lets you do that.

-- 
-Chuck

PS: I suppose that asking why GCC keeps changing how it does C++ symbol name 
mangling ought to be discussed on a GCC forum, but considering that FreeBSD 
keeps a vendor branch, why don't the maintainers choose not import changes 
which break the C++ ABI into the FreeBSD version of GCC?