From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Durgin Subject: Re: feedback on supporting libc++ Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 17:19:20 -0800 Message-ID: <52C21B98.40109@inktank.com> References: <527157C0.40802@inktank.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-gg0-f179.google.com ([209.85.161.179]:40846 "EHLO mail-gg0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932365Ab3LaBUK (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Dec 2013 20:20:10 -0500 Received: by mail-gg0-f179.google.com with SMTP id l4so2434886ggi.10 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2013 17:20:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Noah Watkins Cc: "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" , Gregory Farnum , Gregory Farnum On 12/27/2013 03:34 PM, Noah Watkins wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Josh Durgin wrote: >> On 10/29/2013 03:51 PM, Noah Watkins wrote: >> >> unsafe to me. Could you check whether you can run 'rados ls' compiled >> against an old librados, but dynamically loading librados from this >> branch compiled in c++98 mode? > > I'm still working on this, but my understanding so far from libc++ > documentation is that libc++ and libstdc++ are API but not ABI > compatible, so there shouldn't be an expectation that librados binary > library built against libstc++ will work if dynamically linked against > libc++. I meant if it was compiled against libstdc++ both times, I was curious whether changing std::tr1::shared_ptr to ceph::shared_ptr would result in any incompatibility. I just tried this, and it worked fine (I think because it does not actually create a new c++ type, but acts like a typedef and just creates an alias), so I've got no issues with this approach. Josh