Re: [boost] [boost, config, context, log, 1.58] address-model and architecture detection

Subject: Re: [boost] [boost, config, context, log, 1.58] address-model and architecture detection
From: Klaim - Joël Lamotte (mjklaim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-04-24 05:11:19

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Klaim - Joël Lamotte <mjklaim_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Gavin Lambert <gavinl_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 24/04/2015 19:42, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>>
>>> On 24 April 2015 at 00:07, Asbjørn <lordcrc_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Instead we keep two separate directory trees for 32bit and 64bit
>>>> dependencies, everything from source to lib/dll files.
>>>>
>>>
>>> FYI, separate folders is what, AFAIK, CoApp+NuGet native packages use
>>> and what, hopefully, is becoming a de-facto standard on Windows.
>>>
>>
>> Separate folders is what every Windows project I've seen has done for
>> decades.  It's also how Visual Studio builds files for multiple platforms
>> by default.  I'm fairly certain it's already "standard".
>>
>>
> Yes, that's what almost all my dependencies do indeed.
>
>

Now that I think about it, I also use this convention when building boost
binaries myself:

pushd .\boost
call bootstrap.bat
call b2 --prefix=. -j8 --buid-type=complete toolset=msvc-12.0
architecture=x86 install
call b2 --prefix=. -j8 --buid-type=complete --libdir=./lib/x64
toolset=msvc-12.0 architecture=x86 address-model=64 install
popd

Then, as pointed in the ticket, I use a cmake script which will ask the
user to provide Boost_LIBRARYDIR explicitely
so that I chose the right directory for binaries (even if boost was found
already by cmake).

>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>>
>
>