Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-28 16:38:26

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Paul Gregor" <gregod_at_[hidden]>

> I believe that #1 is not the case for most users. Boost _generally_ seems
> to maintain source-level compatibility between versions, and your system
> won't come to a grinding halt if you install new headers and don't
> recompile.
> I believe that #2 is much more likely, if Boost is to be used in several
> projects. Project A might link against 1.25.1, whereas Project B links
> against 1.28.0. Having different directories for the Boost compiled
> libraries is a nuisance in this case.

Agreed, in principle.

> Here's what I'd like from a *nix perspective:
> If I go grab version 1.x.y of Boost, build it and install it as root,
> I'd like to have easy access to the Boost libraries. Under Unix, this
> means that:
> 1) Headers should go straight into $prefix/include/boost, so I can just
> #include <boost/foo.hpp> and use Boost. No command-line flags, no hassle.
> Versioning the directories (e.g., $prefix/include/boost/1.27.0/boost) is
> an annoyance for the few users that don't need mult>iple versions of the
> headers.

Can't you have the best of both worlds by using a symbolic link?

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