Is libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so backward compatable with libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2
scouter at bigpond.net.au
Wed Feb 27 10:29:07 EST 2002
Antony Stace <s45652001 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I just installed Redhat 7.2 and then Suns JDK1.4 only to get an error about a missing shared library
> [antony at ringo antony]$ javac
> Error: failed /usr/java/j2sdk1.4.0/jre/lib/i386/client/libjvm.so, because libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
[ ... ]
> Problem solved(javac now works), or is it really? Should I really install a package which contains the libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 or is
> libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so backward compatiable with libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2?
No, the libraries won't be entirely binary compatible.
Generally, when the library soname changes major versions it means that
the library's binary interface has changed somehow. If you do funny
symlink tricks like you have, and you only use the part of the library
that hasn't changed the binary interface, it should work. But that's a
If your JVM starts to use parts of the library that have changed the
binary interface, you'll see mysterious seg faults and JVM bugs.
Sam "Eddie" Couter | mailto:scouter at bigpond.net.au
Debian Developer | mailto:eddie at debian.org
| jabber:sam at jabber.topic.com.au
OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux/attachments/20020227/c3ac6685/attachment.bin
More information about the linux