[boost] Re: more config/auto_link nitpicks

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-04 13:57:43

"John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]> writes:

>> > As per our discussion could we remove this lib prefix? Who should agree?
>>
>> We need something to differentiate between static libraries and dll import
>> libraries, I suppose a "static_" prefix would actually be my preference.
>> One thing though - it is *extremely* painful to change and then test this
>> (as well as modifying and testing the header, I have a lot of regex
>> makefiles that also have to change, and then be tested with every possible
>> build variant you can imagine :-(  ), changing the name of the prefix
>> wouldn't be too bad for me though if that's really desirable.  To be
> honest
>> I'm not too unhappy with the current "lib" prefix though.
>
> And on second thoughts I'm not sure it's possible the remove the "lib"
> prefix if we also want to ensure a consistent naming scheme across Unix and
> Windows platforms.

Do we want to ensure that?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com