From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 14 11:58:19 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FCD37B401 for ; Sat, 14 Jun 2003 11:58:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iceberg.ics911.net (h-66-167-103-228.CHCGILGM.covad.net [66.167.103.228]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DACD43FBD for ; Sat, 14 Jun 2003 11:58:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from karl@FS.Denninger.Net) Received: from FS.Denninger.Net (ip68-1-62-4.pn.at.cox.net [68.1.62.4]) by iceberg.ics911.net (8.12.2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5EIwCGn098459; Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:58:13 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from karl@FS.Denninger.Net) Received: from FS.Denninger.Net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by FS.Denninger.Net (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h5EIwCkw001207; Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:58:12 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from karl@FS.Denninger.Net) Received: (from karl@localhost) by FS.Denninger.Net (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Submit) id h5EIw791001206; Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:58:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <20030614135807.A1198@Denninger.Net> Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:58:07 -0500 From: Karl Denninger To: Dan Nelson References: <20030614113234.A557@Denninger.Net> <20030614094129.W79103@carver.gumbysoft.com> <20030614115137.A734@Denninger.Net> <20030614172811.GR53468@dan.emsphone.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: <20030614172811.GR53468@dan.emsphone.com>; from Dan Nelson on Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 12:28:11PM -0500 Organization: Karl's Sushi and Packet Smashers X-Die-Spammers: Spammers cheerfully broiled for supper and served with ketchup! cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Compiling under 5.x for 4.x releases? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 18:58:19 -0000 Thanks; I guess that means that for now I keep the production build machine is 4.8-STABLE, and I keep 5.x as a "play" environment until people move over. The fun will begin when migration begins in significant numbers, but I still need to support both! -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@denninger.net) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist http://www.denninger.net Tired of spam at your company? LOOK HERE! http://childrens-justice.org Working for family and children's rights http://diversunion.org LOG IN AND GET YOUR TANK STICKERS TODAY! On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 12:28:11PM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Jun 14), Karl Denninger said: > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 09:43:01AM -0700, Doug White wrote: > > > On Sat, 14 Jun 2003, Karl Denninger wrote: > > > > > > > Can it be done with a command-line switch to the compiler or gcc, > > > > or am I consigned to dual-booting? > > > > > > You mean building apps linked against 4.X libs vs. 5.X? With some > > > creative -L flags you might be able to get it to not use > > > /usr/lib/libc* and use /usr/lib/compat/libc* instead, which has > > > copies of certain 4.X libs in it. > > > > > > Let us know if you get it working :) > > > > Will play with that one.... > > That won't work. The reason shared libraries get their versions bumped > and the old ones move into compat is that the ABI changes. Unless you > kept the headers for those old shlibs laying around someplace, gcc will > compile programs using the ABI for the libs in /usr/lib. > > > The problem is that I have a lot of users on the 4.x release(s) of > > the OS, and have binary apps that I'm supporting for them. Linking > > static is an option, but does ugly things to the file sizes. > > That will break the first time a 5.0-compiled library decides to use a > syscall not in 4.x.