TC 3.x: Are further toolchain and / or library updates planned?

[maro]

Thanks Arslan and Juanito for your comments.

OK, so using pkg-config depends on the presence of a ".pc" file e.g. in 'base-dev.tcz'. A couple of points therefore come to mind:

• There will be system libraries for which no ".pc" files are not included in for example 'base-dev.tcz'.
• OTOH there could be libraries which don't use them at all (e.g. libjpeg?)

Furthermore I assume that 'base-dev.tcz' has yet to be updated for those libraries changed in TC 3.0a4. Does that potentially cause a problem when the header files of a library (e.g. v1.2.3 of zlib) are not the same versions as the shared library (e.g. v1.2.5 of zlib)? Does this then potentially require a "re-rebuild" of extensions that have been compiled during the time that this state prevailed?

@^thehatsrule^: Gee, that trick is "magic"!! Problem is all the ones I quickly tried were segfaulting 

[Juanito]

Furthermore I assume that 'base-dev.tcz' has yet to be updated for those libraries changed in TC 3.0a4. Does that potentially cause a problem when the header files of a library (e.g. v1.2.3 of zlib) are not the same versions as the shared library (e.g. v1.2.5 of zlib)? Does this then potentially require a "re-rebuild" of extensions that have been compiled during the time that this state prevailed?

Correct, base-dev has not yet been updated for the updated base libs - we're waiting to see if everything works OK first.

I would suggest it's probably better to avoid compiling extensions against alpha testing versions of the base. You would expect extensions compiled against alpha1-3 to be OK as new versions of libs are meant to be backwards compatible, but you never know (cf zlib libxml2 story).