Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost

Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-21 21:23:43

On 21/06/2017 19:01, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> Niall Douglas wrote:
>> > Even if so, you still need to be able to answer the question "how do
>> I > link to Asio in such a way so that its dependency System is >
>> statically/dynamically linked?"
>>
>> I'm saying that ASIO header only users almost certainly will also want
>> header only Boost.System.
> 
> I don't think so (although now that it has been fixed to use Winapi
> instead of <windows.h>, maybe).
> 
> But even if true, users of static library A that uses Asio will not
> necessarily want a header-only Boost.System, which means that static
> library A has to have a way to link to Asio "statically".

Surely users of static library A that uses ASIO will use the static
library edition of ASIO and the static library edition of System?

AFIO v1 used static library ASIO. Made a huge difference to compile
times, it was my default choice for code development.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/