Robert Dailey wrote:It was changed to not adding anything to the name (not even "mt" or "d), except
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> No offense intended -- many people don't know, and there are alternatives.
>> Can
>> you please apply the attached, replace --layout=system with --layout=tagged
>> and try again? You should get the same results that --layout=system had in
>> 1.38.
>
>
> I was not offended. I was actually joking about it, but it's hard to express
> that through text.
>
> It is not a bug -- system layout was changed on the purpose and will stay
>> this
>> way. It's just everybody has different requirements and desired naming.
>
>
> What exactly was it changed to?
that on Unix, version number is added at the end -- after ".so" extension, and
a symlink without version number is created.
On Unix, or on Windows? On Unix you are right, and --layout=system in 1.39
> I have *never* found a library that used a
> naming convention that boost uses. I also have yet to find someone that
> actually likes the mangled boost library names. There is no practical reason
> to use mangled names as far as I'm concerned.
produces names that use the same convention as every other library. On Windows,
I have no idea.
Let me know if it works.
> The only thing that I can think of that the extra mangling would address is
> side-by-side installations of boost. For example, someone could have 1.38
> and 1.39 installed together on the same system and library files will
> coexist, and not be overwritten.
>
> Anyway, thank you for the patch. I will try it out when I get home in a few
> hours.