From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-27 09:38:29
[2003-10-27] John Maddock wrote:
>> 2. lib prefix
>> What is a rationale for lib prefix for static libraries? First of all of
>> looks excessive since suffix is lib anyway. Second - dll is also library
>> finally why not use suffix schema similar to other options
>Good question, it's just the way in which bjam has always done it, so
>the format used in the header as well.
Not sure if this answers it...
Some simple reasons to have a lib prefix on libraries:
* It's the standard on *nix, so it's less confusin to make it that way
on all platforms.
* It's needed in Windows because if those files are going to live with a
DLL build they need to have a different name in order to not collide with
the DLL import library file.
>> 4. Toolset usage
>> Now finally how should I define my toolset to select proper name of the
>> library depends on all these options. Shouldn't we have similar
>> in boost build that just allow me to say: link regex library and proper
>> will be chosen automatically?
>Yes, but you'll have to ask the Boost.Build guys about that.
Ah, not sure what your asking here... I guess I'll have to look at this new
header... When I switch back to Linux.
-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera (at) acm.org - grafik (at) redshift-software.com
-- 102708583 (at) icq
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk