From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-07 09:15:26
I fully realise that - and take full responsibility :-)
I'm sure it will all work as fully released.
(And the Boost version will be defined too).
Meanwhile, the concept is working very well for me. I think it is a good
Paul A Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria, LA8 8AB UK
+44 1539 561830 Mobile +44 7714 33 02 04
| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of John Maddock
| Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 11:56 AM
| To: Boost mailing list
| Subject: Re: [boost] Draft Tutorial / Guidelines for
| AuthorsofBoostLibrariesContaining Separate Source
| >which now includes
| >#define BOOST_LIB_NAME "unit_test_library"
| >#define BOOST_LIB_DIAGNOSTIC "on"// Show library file details.
| That should be:
| #define BOOST_LIB_NAME unit_test_library
| #define BOOST_LIB_DIAGNOSTIC "on"// Show library file details.
| now, and remember that the name mangling scheme has changed now also, so
| unless your build of "unit_test_library" was built using Rene's new install
| rule, it won't be correctly named for the header to pick it up.
| > reveals that
| > "BOOST_LIB_VERSION not defined for auto_link!"
| > I can't see this being defined in the auto_link.hpp file.
| That's cos it's in the latest version of boost/version.hpp, updating part of
| your tree without the rest is always risky :-)
| Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk