Dependencies / compatibility for 2.5 SP

[Christopher Bongaarts]

On 11/16/2011 1:09 PM, Cantor, Scott wrote:

> It doesn't matter what layer I use it, every last piece of C++ linked has
> to be built with stlport (or possibly even a different STL, I think Apache
> offers one now). The only unaffected layers are C-only libraries. You
> can't mix STLs, ever. You can't mix C libs either, but people don't notice
> because there's never more than one to use.

So that seems to suggest that the dependent libraries (opensaml, 
xmltooling, etc.) would need to use stlport.

Would OpenSSL and/or Apache also need to be rebuilt against stlport?  I 
don't think there's any C++ code in either of them...

> The hassle here is that the STL is normally part of the OS, and patched
> with it. Using a third party STL is a different animal than I have any
> experience with. If you were to package this for Solaris, you'd have to
> package stlport also. It isn't much of a package, of course, just one file.

Our distribution system can shuffle extra files around without any 
hassle, so I think we'd be OK on that front.

-- 
%%  Christopher A. Bongaarts   %%  cab at umn.edu          %%
%%  OIT - Identity Management  %%  http://umn.edu/~cab  %%
%%  University of Minnesota    %%  +1 (612) 625-1809    %%