From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-12 07:27:27
Neal Becker wrote:
> The "official" Redhat/Fedora rpms for boost-1.32 had set soname as
> e.g.: libboost_date_time.so.1
> instead of libboost_date_time.so.1.32
> I wonder if I should do the same for 1.33? Does anyone know if the API is
> compatible from 1.32 to 1.33?
I'm sure it's not. Even such small library as program_options has binary
incompatible changes from 1.32 to 1.33 (for example, removed method). I
suspect that larger libraries has lots of such changes.
> Or, has Redhat made a mistake in doing this?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk