Subject: Re: [boost] Moving the include directory to $BOOST_ROOT/include? (again)
From: Gavin Lambert (gavinl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-03 03:50:38
On 3/06/2015 18:38, Bjørn Roald wrote:
> Having said that, conceptually I like the stage step as a build step and
> the stage folder as a staging area within $BOOST_ROOT of what will be
> installed somewhere else if you use "b2 install --prefix=PREFIX", with
> this as a concept the message at the end of the build could be:
> The Boost C++ Libraries were successfully built!
> The following directory should be added to compiler include paths:
> The following directory should be added to linker library paths:
> Use ./b2 install --prefix=PREFIX to install boost elsewhere.
It seems weird to not have "include" and "lib" in the same place, so if
a staging dir is how Boost wants to build its libraries, it should do
the same thing for the headers, especially since they're getting
copied/linked from the library subdirs anyway.
> As a side effect boost users that preferred to build boost themselves
> and opted to not use "b2 install" could still use $BOOST_ROOT/boost.
> I think that is unfortunate, maybe we should have hidden the header
> links somewhere out of sight as long as they where needed, maybe
> within $BOOST_ROOT/bin.v2 and done what we are discussing now with
> proper copies for external use in the first place. Possibly as part
> of a modified "b2 stage" target.
I would prefer if the "b2 install" step were still optional, but I don't
see this as a problem as users could just refer to
$BOOST_ROOT/stage/include and $BOOST_ROOT/stage/lib, exactly as shown in
the proposed message above.
(Or the user could manually copy just the stage folder elsewhere to
"install" it -- provided that it didn't contain any symlinks, which is a
fairly safe bet on Windows.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk