Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #4828: Boost fails to compile on AIX 6.1 with IBM XL C/C++ V10.01

Subject: Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #4828: Boost fails to compile on AIX 6.1 with IBM XL C/C++ V10.01
From: Boost C++ Libraries (noreply_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-13 14:22:39

#4828: Boost fails to compile on AIX 6.1 with IBM XL C/C++ V10.01
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------
  Reporter:  cpaolino@…            |       Owner:                
      Type:  Bugs                  |      Status:  new           
 Milestone:  To Be Determined      |   Component:  Building Boost
   Version:  Boost 1.44.0          |    Severity:  Problem       
Resolution:                        |    Keywords:                
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------

Comment (by Michael Haubenwallner <michael.haubenwallner@…>):

 This patch allows for building boost without duplicate symbols on AIX 6.1
 both compile- and link-time.

 However, I don't think using '#ifdef _AIX61' is the right thing to do
 here.

 But I don't have an idea where the /real/ problem is:
 * in AIX6.1's <math.h> in that it should not define these symbols as
 inlines\\
   (so a proper fix should go to AIX6.1's math.h to drop them, we use
 #ifndef _AIX61 meanwhile), or
 * in other platform's <math.h> in that they lack the (inline) definition
 of these symbols\\
   (so a proper fix should go to their math.h (and math-lib), we keep them
 in boost meanwhile), or
 * in boost in that it should not define these symbols itself at all\\
   (so a proper fix should drop these definitions from boost code), or
 * in boost in that it does not know that AIX6.1 defines these symbols\\
   (so using #ifndef _AIX61 is the proper fix), or
 * others?

 Thank you!

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4828#comment:5>
Boost C++ Libraries <http://www.boost.org/>
Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.