From: Neal Becker (ndbecker2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-05 13:27:38
John Maddock wrote:
> Neal Becker wrote:
>>> But in any case if ICU is installed maybe specifying the lib path is
>>> superfluous anyway? Can we rely on everything being in the usual
>>> search paths on Unix systems?
>> That was with bjam.
> Oh :-(
> Digging deaper, it looks like the bbv1 and bbv2 got out of synch at some
> point, I'll have to look at this again.
Let me clarify this. Sorry if I mispoke.
I ran bjam and observed:
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libm.so when searching for -lm
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libm.a when searching for -lm
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libc.so when searching for -lc
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libc.a when searching for -lc
This tells me something is doing -L/usr/lib, and it shouldn't be doing that.
So, I searched around (blindly) to see where it was coming from. I think I
mis-identified gcc-shared.mak as the culprit. Point is, there IS a problem
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk