Subject: Re: [boost] Fw: Interlibrary version cchecking
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-19 01:43:17
Robert Ramey wrote:
>>> among many others. My proposal is only an idea and I'm
>>> not prepared to mount a serious defense of it. But it seems
>>> that something along these lines is going to be necessary.'
>> Yes, something along these lines. I'm just wondering if you are
>> reinventing tank treads when we already have a perfectly good wheel.
> I hope so, but I'm not seeing it.
> The ....so.m.n.o scheme is fine as far as it goes - but It doesn't say
> about how it is to be enforced at compile/link/runtime.
It's enforced, on Unix, by linking against the properly-named .so, and then,
at runtime, the linker will naturally complain unless you have a library
of compatible version around.
At present, each version of Boost is incompatible with every other version
of itself, and the .so names represent this very well.
I don't have experience with doing similar on Windows, but I'm pretty sure
that the manifests can be employed for the same effect -- and that's the right
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk