Re: [boost] Customer Friendlier Boost Installation -- (Finally)Getting Started

From: Andrey Melnikov (melnikov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-05 12:55:18

David Abrahams wrote:
> "Paul A Bristow" <pbristow_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
> 
>>Well I suspect I am not the only one confused already ;-)
>>
>>(I did claim to be well qualified!)
>>
>>A definition of 'Boost root' seems useful, for a start, even if it seems
>>obvious to you.
> 
> 
> It doesn't seem obvious to me, and if you read through my replies in
> this thread you will see that I suggested specific text that indicates
> which directory it is.
> 
> 
>>The table of bjam options appears to me to provide c:\boost as the Win32
>>default for where bjam puts the Boost version files.
>>
>>How do you suggest switching to a new Boost version 1.34?
>>And back again if it proves to cause trouble :-(
> 
> 
> I don't understand the question.
> 
The question was: How do you suggest to have multiple boost versions 
installed side by side?
> 
>>Are you suggesting having c:\boost_1_33_0 and c:\boost_1_34_0 ... ?
>>(c:\boost_1_33_latestCVS?)
> 
> No, but that seems like a reasonable approach.  The specific path is
> up to you.  I might use:
> 
> c:\boost\1.33.0\
> c:\boost\1.34.0\
> c:\boost\cvs\
> 
> 
>>Victor Wagner posted a method using an environment variable which
>>worked well for him, allowing a smooth switch to and from release
>>versions.  should we suggest this?
> 
> 
> I don't like to recommend anything that requires an environment
> variable to be set up.

I don't like either. You may need to switch currently used version 
frequently. Environment variables aren't suited for frequent changes.

I'd recommend to set appropriate header search path in your projects. 
And if you use boost.build v2, you should have multiple versions of 
boost //site-config/boost-1_33 etc configured in your site-config.

>>PS You might reduce resistance to using bjam by saying a bit more
>>explicitly what it does
>>
>>"bjam runs the compiler and linker externally to any IDE..."
> 
> 
> That's a good idea.
> 
> 
>>It may come to a surprise to some Windows programmers that it is
>>possible to run the compiler outside the IDE.
> 
> 
> Very true :)
> 
> 
>>And 'define' a toolset (compiler & linker etc)?
> 
> 
> Also a good idea.
> 
Who is going to contribute? I'd like to, but I don't like where should I 
put this guide. Maybe we should put it into bbv2 docs, because updating 
bbv1 docs is a waste of time due to migration to bbv1. Do you think that 
indeed we have to update bbv1 docs too?