Re: [boost] Bug#429533: new proposal: boost-config

From: Domenico Andreoli (cavokz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-04 22:25:18

On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 09:41:05AM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Martin Wille wrote:
> 
> > Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >> What is going to happen? It sounds like you've omitted some part of
> >> your email.
> > 
> > 
> > The message looks complete here.
> 
> Let me clarify -- the message goes like this:
> 
> > Now Joe User writes his app on the Fedora system and links Boost.DateTime
> > using the familiar -lboost_date_time switch. He builds the app and
> > tries it on both his Fedora system and the friend's Debian one.  What is
> > going to happen?
> > 
> > BTW, ....
> 
> So either "What is going to happen?" is a question to recipients of the
> email (and I don't know what exactly is being asked), or Domenico meant
> do tell what is going to happen, but did not.
> 
> The only reason why said app won't work on one of the systems is possibly
> binary incompatibility between gcc/libstdc++/libc, which is probably
> not what's being discussed.

I was referring to this reason.

I find that fully decorated names are a wanted feature to achieve sane
binary portability. The case I mentioned might even run but crash subtly.

If instead the toolset was encoded in the library name, app would not
even run, saving the user from the debugger.

This is a binary compatibility issue induced by current --layout=system.

-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
 --[ http://www.dandreoli.com/gpgkey.asc
   ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936  4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50