Re: [boost] What variants should be build on Windows by default?

Subject: Re: [boost] What variants should be build on Windows by default?
From: Klaim - Joël Lamotte (mjklaim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-05 15:10:00

On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Olaf van der Spek <ml_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> What library variants should be build on Windows by default?
>
> Currently it builds:
>   --build-type=<type>     Build the specified pre-defined set of
> variations of
>                           the libraries. Note, that which variants get
> built
>                           depends on what each library supports.
>
>                               -- minimal -- (default) Builds a minimal set
> of
>                               variants. On Windows, these are static
>                               multithreaded libraries in debug and release
>                               modes, using shared runtime. On Linux, these
> are
>                               static and shared multithreaded libraries in
>                               release mode.
>
> Personally I use a static-release runtime often (for simple deployments).
> What variants do others use and what should be build by default?
>
>
(my experience with boost might not be representative)

I use the static versions of both debug and release for almost all my
projects (which works on windows),
though for some projects I need the shared version.
There is one long-term-dev cross-platform project which currently uses
static boost libraries but I realized
recently that I will have to switch to shared versions very soon.
By default I tend to always start with the static version [1],
but it tend to evolve/change the more the projects grows and I split it in
separate binaries.

I build everything (static&shared, debug&release, 32&64bits) each time
there is a new boost
release I want to use in one of the projects, then I target the version I
want to use for each project
separately. [2]
(note: I always use shared runtime)

I don't have a preference for the default build type on windows, as I
explicitly build all types.
Maybe having the same rule for all platforms (shared?) would avoid
surprises for users.
Maybe defaulting to static on windows is so common that it should be the
default.

By the way, did you consider not having a default? (requiring to explicitly
state which build type to use?)

[1] To avoid having to setup scripts moving dlls around,
      boost is never "installed" on my dev computer as I use several
versions depending on the project.

[2] I build myself to be able to quickly patch boost when needed.

> Greetings,
>
> --
> Olaf
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>