Subject: Re: [boost] Library names in system layout on linux
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-09 12:03:39
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 11:46, Phil Endecott
<spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> I've written some open-source stuff that uses Boost and the inconsistency of
> library naming between distributions and between different versions has been
> a real pain for me, and for my users.
>
> My main feeling is that I don't care what the libraries are called, as long
> as the naming is consistent.
>
This seems like the important point, to me. What if there were a way
to specify what you want, and for some program to find whatever
matches best?
> At present, I'm shipping a Makefile that looks for libboost_thread-mt. This
> seems to keep most but not all people happy. I have the impression that the
> majority of distributions are shipping libraries with -mt suffixes but
> without the -gcc stuff, while a few are also stripping the -mt. I encourage
> you to converge towards the current majority position.
>
Suppose there were a boost_link program so that instead, you said
something like:
`boost_link =static =mt +gcc -stlport thread`
And it gave you back the the static, mt version of the lib, preferring
gcc and without stlport? (The script would find the shortest filename
that satisfies all the conditions.)