On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 03:48:06PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:

> Discussed in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel.../msg01173.html


There's not a lot of discussion there -- just an announcement really.

> With glibc-2.5 and gcc-4.1.2 (and gcc-4.2), the 'long double'
> data type did change from a 64bit representation to a 128bit
> representation on alpha, powerpc, sparc, s390.


The referenced message, above, is over three weeks old. Is that
when the change went in? Does that mean any package on the list
built since then is buggy?


> To allow partial upgrades of packages, we will need to rename all
> packages holding libraries with the long double data type in their
> API.


So what upgrades are we worried about?

If packages built in the last three weeks are buggy, they may already
be in "testing". So we're not to worry about upgrades from testing
versions?

If we're only worried about upgrades from the version in stable, then
we don't need to rename a package that has never been in stable,
correct?


> Both libc and libstdc++ do not need to be renamed, because they
> support both representations. We rename the library packages on all
> architectures to avoid name mismatches between architectures (you
> can avoid the renaming by supporting both datatype representations
> in the library as done in glibc and libstdc++, but unless a library
> is prepared for that, it does not seem to be worth the effort).


How is it that libc and libstdc++ support both representations? How
would another library support both?

Thanks,
-Steve

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGfS7D0i2bPSHbMcURAqlqAKCO9y4XCxqVkuxtxRFeNf dSBVsJeQCffrre
zmgG2l+w9GDz4KDoMMm9hCU=
=ImPc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----