Subject: Re: [boost] Encoding address-model in library names
From: Klaim - JoÃ«l Lamotte (mjklaim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-05 23:38:36
On 5 July 2017 at 23:44, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> > This being a Serious Change, the prudent thing to do is to wait out
> > 1.65, then proceed.
> > On the other hand, experience shows that this kind of change is only
> > tested when a release goes out anyway; delaying it for four more months
> > would not help much.
> > Therefore, I'm calling for opinions; would people want this to go into
> > 1.65? Into 1.66? Not at all?
> I can see it may break end user's scripting, but waiting won't help that.
> The only showstopper potential is if this change causes the 260 char
> path limit on Windows to be exceeded. You may not think this a problem,
> but think of Jenkins etc. Even a few extra chars in a filename can
> produce weird hard to diagnose failures.
In my experience, this issue cannot be fixed by tweaking such feature.
Also if you want short names for a specific project, my understanding is
that it's still possible to chose to do so.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk