[Coin-discuss] COIN with g++ 2.95.3

[Stephan Hennig]

Matthew Saltzman schrieb:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Stephan Hennig wrote:
> 
>> Matthew Saltzman schrieb:
>> > On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Stephan Hennig wrote:
>> >
>> >> because of another software library which isn't supported anymore I have
>> >> to use COIN with g++ 2.95.3. Am I going to run into problems with that
>> >> compiler and do I have to care about something specific? Or does COIN
>> >> work fine with that?
>> >>
>> >
>> > At one time, gcc 2.95.3 was required.  Since then, we have made changes so
>> > that it compiles and runs with the latest gcc, but I don't believe we've
>> > made any changes known to break 2.95.3 compatibility.  The reference in
>> > the archives was to problems we had getting things to link and run with
>> > early builds of Red Hat's 2.96 "interim" compiler.  At the time, the
>> > clean gcc 2.95.3 was the fallback.  Later builds of the 2.96 compiler
>> > worked with no problem.
>> >
>> > The Osi unitTest using CLP compiles with no errors on my machine (Red Hat
>> > Linux 9) but I haven't managed to get it to link to the older libraries.
>> > Object files from 2.95.3 will reliably fail to link with the newer glibc
>> > and libstdc++, but I doubt that will be a problem for you if you are
>> > already using the old compiler and libraries.
>>
>> When I asked the company
>> for an older version of their library (which is under constant
>> development) they told me, I could probably run into compiler issues
>> with that. Now, I think they mean the glibc/libstdc++ libraries. Is that
>> right? As I see it I have to move to some linux groups with that
> 
> Yes, that's the issue.
> 
>> problem. I don't even know how to downgrade gcc yet. But system
>> libraries too - that's hard work for me. The other way would be to
>> implement what the unsupported library does with actual versions of all
>> used components (sounds promising, but), it solves the multiple resource
>> constrained shortest path problem. Hard work either. :(
> 
> What Linux are you actually running?

It's Red Hat 9.0 with g++ 3.2.2 and

[work at localhost ]$rpm --query --info glibc
Name        : glibc
Relocations : (not relocateable)
Version     : 2.3.2
Vendor      : Red Hat, Inc.
Release     : 11.9
Build Date  : Fre 14 Mär 2003 01:48:24 CET
Install Date: Fre 07 Nov 2003 20:11:08 CET
Build Host  : daffy.perf.redhat.com
Group       : Systemumgebung/Bibliotheken
Source RPM  : glibc-2.3.2-11.9.src.rpm
Size        : 11183614
License     : LGPL
Signature   : DSA/SHA1, Fre 14 Mär 2003 01:56:54 CET, Key ID
219180cddb42a60e
Packager    : Red Hat, Inc. <http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
Summary     : Die GNU-libc-Bibliotheken.



[work at localhost ]$rpm --query --info libstdc++
Name        : libstdc++
Relocations : (not relocateable)
Version     : 3.2.2
Vendor      : Red Hat, Inc.
Release     : 5
Build Date  : Die 25 Feb 2003 14:53:15 CET
Install Date: Fre 07 Nov 2003 20:12:52 CET
Build Host  : stripples.devel.redhat.com
Group       : Systemumgebung/Bibliotheken
Source RPM  : gcc-3.2.2-5.src.rpm
Size        : 710608
License     : GPL
Signature   : DSA/SHA1, Die 25 Feb 2003 16:04:24 CET, Key ID
219180cddb42a60e
Packager    : Red Hat, Inc. <http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
URL         : http://gcc.gnu.org
Summary     : Die GNU Standard C++ Bibliothek v3.


I didn't apply the update of glibc discussed some days ago in thread
'[Coin-discuss] AAP_BP example' concerning OSL problems so far. Now that
I have the necessary rpms, may I before doing the 2.95.3 related stuff
(I think yes)?

> You almost certainly don't want to downgrade all system libraries.
> Instead install the old libraries alongside your current ones and secify
> that they are the ones you want to link with for this application only.
> If you link statically, you should not have problems.

Yes, linking statically is possible.

> (I haven't tried very hard to get it right yet, but I'll try to get
> better instructions together soon.)

Thanks so far.

Regards,
Stephan Hennig