3. Make mangling style part of library Provides and Requires.
How are the chances to reduce surprises from name mangling by such an approach? How often were similar attempts discussed already?
The third one sounds feasible, something like
Requires: liby2.so.4(stdc++11)
assuming it is possible to detect how library was built.
Would you like to introduce dedicated variables?
I do not know if this information is stored in library though.
It will finally land in special function names, won't it? But I guess that it might be inappropriate to consider another demangle step in the software build process at the end. Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org