Re: [boost] Re: Customer Friendlier Boost Installation

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-26 12:14:51

David Abrahams wrote:
> Stefan Strasser <sstrasser_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> I don't know anything about boost installation on windows, since I'm
>> using a prebuilt debian package, and that's my point:
>>
>> from the discussion it seems the building process is not as easy as
>> it could be. so, isn't it a better choice to provide binary packages
>> for the most popular compilers instead of writing an installer?
>
> A binary package for the most popular compiler (VC++) is an
> installer.  That's the way binary packages are delivered on Windows.

A binary package of the .zip variety would be both good enough and 
preferable, as it wouldn't involve running untrusted executables.

That aside, FWIW I've found bjam relatively painless to use (once it's 
present). I didn't even need to specify an -sTOOLS option or run 
vcvars32.bat IIRC. For the scenario where one already has the headers up and 
running but doesn't want to "bjam install" the whole package, the main 
obstacle is figuring out which -sBUILD combination generates 
"library-sgd-mt-whatever" when autolinking kicks in.

Or can bjam figure these out automatically from the target name of 
"library-sgd-mt-whatever.lib"? It didn't occur to me to try it. ;-)