GCC 3.2

[Benjamin Kosnik]

> You could certainly do this too.  The idea behind having it done in
> libstdc++ is that we can verify that sizes/layouts of any externally
> visible classes and structures don't change from one rev of libstdc++ to
> another.  That in conjunction with testing the signatures of every
> externally visible function gives us a much better chance of keeping
> libstdc++ compatible from one rev to the next.

Right. I think this is the preferred way to go, it just requires much
(much much much) more work than simply swapping libstdc++.so's.

It looks like LSB is also interested in some kind of solution like this,
so perhaps there is some synergy there.

-benjamin