Subject: Re: [boost] Library names in system layout on linux
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-08 12:42:47
Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>>> How will you name the single threaded version?
>>> The same -- like it is done on Linux.
>> I'm not quite happy with this. I assume, other libraries don't have the
>> configuration flexibility which boost has, therefore reduced mangling is
>> sufficient for them. With boost it can lead to subtle problems when an
>> application begins using the wrong library. This small suffix doesn't
>> complicate the name too much, so I'd like it to be there. As an
>> alternative, we could drop 'mt', but introduce 'st' in single-threaded
>> builds.
>
> Recall, we're talking about --layout=system, which is explicitly meant for
> system integrators. So it's not a "small suffix", it is "incompatible with
> system naming of libraries".
Is it? AFAIK, there are no specific requirements on the library name
itself (by which I mean everything between 'lib' and '.so' or '.a'). It
can be 'boost_filesystem' or 'boost_filesystem_mt' - I don't see much
difference for packaging purpose.
> There is zillion ways to compile any library,
> so this matter is not specific to boost.
> It is known that compiled versions of some Boost libraries have different ABI
> in ST and MT mode. But then, Boost is not one library of such kind.
But why introduce the danger of misuse, especially when there is no such
problem now?