Boost logo

Boost :

From: Phil Edwards (pedwards_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-04 15:56:26

On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 02:22:46PM -0600, Dan Nuffer wrote:
> Jeff Squyres wrote:
> >
> > --> RECOMENDATION: Have extract to its own subdirectory.
> [snip]
> > --> RECOMENDATION: Add some kind of version number into boost.
[more snippage]
> I think distributing a .zip file that doesn't extract to a subdirectory
> is a good idea also, that is what Windows users expect from .zip files.

If both a .zip and a .tar.gz are to be distributed, then they should
probably behave the same. Even if we stick with just the .zip for
now, I would expect some kind of directory to be created by default.
What's more, the unzipping programs I'm familiar with have settings to
ignore the subdirectory pathnames and extract into the current directory
upon user request, but the reverse is not true.

The .# files are indeed accidental CVS cruft; apparently the zip file was
created by someone with a not-quite-clean working directory. They don't
exist in the repository, nor in fresh checkouts.

As far as building the library, Makefiles, and stored version numbers... yes,
those are probably going to be needed at some point. When the library is
"only" a collection of headers, those requirements are somewhat arbitrary,
but if we're having to actually build source files, then those become needed.

Utilities like autoconf, automake, and libtool are really helpful in
this regard. (Using auto* is not difficult. In my experience, only
six people in the world understand libtool; two have entered distant
monasteries under a vow of silence, three are in various padded asylums,
and Alexandre Oliva is subscribed to this list.)


pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com  |  pme at sources dot redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot domains
The gods do not protect fools.  Fools are protected by more capable fools.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at