Re: [boost] 32/64 library name conflict under Windows?

Subject: Re: [boost] 32/64 library name conflict under Windows?
From: Klaim - Joël Lamotte (mjklaim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-09 05:53:08

On 9 March 2016 at 10:35, Paul A. Bristow <pbristow_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Gavin
> Lambert
> > Sent: 08 March 2016 22:45
> > To: boost_at_[hidden]
> > Subject: Re: [boost] 32/64 library name conflict under Windows?
> >
> > On 8/03/2016 17:18, Rene Rivera wrote:
> > > 1. Some people don't fancy auto-linking.
> >
> > I think the only people who don't fancy auto-linking are probably those
> > who are building on Linux or multi-platform, and so can't make use of
> > it.  Encourage the gcc/clang devs to add support for it. :)
> >
> > > A) Having file names with "32" *and* "64" on them?
> >
> > Yes, but rather than just 32 and 64 it should be the actual arch name.
> > Libraries built for ARM should be readily distinguishable from those for
> > x86.
>
> +1 for x86, x64, arm ...
>
> > In fact the option I would personally prefer would be to do both of
> > these at once -- embed the arch into the library name, but also build it
> > to an arch-named output directory.
> >
> > It's not unreasonable to have different library paths for different
> > arches, and with auto-linking the difference in library names is not
> > important when building -- but having different names is important when
> > distributing them local with an application; imagine a case where both a
> > 32-bit exe and a 64-bit exe are to be installed to the same folder.
> > Currently this is not possible because the Boost DLLs will clash.
> >
> > Even where auto-linking is not used, it's just a matter of specifying
> > the library name in the project file / makefile / whatever with a
> > placeholder variable for the arch, or conditionally setting the list of
> > libraries in the same fashion as the library search path.  It's not that
> > hard.
>
> If some people want to split into arch-based folders /x86 /x64 /arm ...,
> then can't they easily do this at library build time
>
>
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_60_0/more/getting_started/windows.html#install-boost-build
>
> "To use a different directory pass the
>   --stagedir=directory
> option to b2."
>
> A few typical build command lines could be provided to help?
>
>
If arch type is not somewhere by default (that is, boost distribution
officially put these files somewhere clear
and identifiable), it means that the tools can't rely on a specific path to
find the right binaries.

> Paul
>
> ---
> Paul A. Bristow
> Prizet Farmhouse
> Kendal UK LA8 8AB
> [phone]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>