Dealing with symbol visibility mismatches

[Thiago Macieira]

Maksim Orlovich wrote:
>> Em Terça-feira 26 Maio 2009, às 16:48:44, Benjamin Reed escreveu:
>>> Does it seem correct to fix the visibility test to check for
>>> kdemacros.h and short-circuit as failing if it's not defined?
>>
>> I'd say that the test should be done only in KDELibs (the module that
>> creates
>> and installs kdemacros.h). Then the result of this test should be
>> installed as
>> well, so that other modules can decide whether to use
>> -fvisbility=hidden in
>> their command-lines as well.
>
>Doesn't this potentially preclude using different compilers for kdelibs
>and kdebase (which ought to be possible if they use same ABI)?

I don't think so. The result is whether the macros expand to anything at 
all. If they do, then you may use any compiler and you may use its switch 
to hide symbols.

If they expand to nothing, then you must not use the switch.

-- 
  Thiago Macieira  -  thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
    PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20090526/547e89b6/attachment.sig>