From: Johan Nilsson (r.johan.nilsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-24 05:41:59
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Johan Nilsson wrote:
>> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>> Note also that nowdays, many folks build Boost because it's
>>> dependency of some other application -- in which case it's even
>>> less likely
>>> the person would like to debug C++ Boost.
>> And what are the chances that this "minimal build" is the exact
>> build that the other application depends on?
>> IMHO, if another application depends on the Boost libraries, that
>> application's development team should also provide an instruction on
>> how to get/install its dependencies.
> On Linux, when using package management, most dependencies on
> are on release version. Just to clarify -- I have no idea what's the
> sane default on windows.
For prebuilt, installable, applications the norm is of course the release
version. But if an application depends on a third-party library, such
dependencies should be included in binary form within the installer package.
This was however not what I was referring to above - I was thinking about
the cases where one would download the source code to e.g. some Open Source
project which depends on Boost. The purpose could be either for development
or as a plain end user.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk