Re: runtime-link

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-05 11:06:07

David Abrahams wrote:

> I think there are a few vagaries which, if cleared up, would help us
> understand what we're talking about:
> 
> 1. What is the definition of "system library"?

"system-library" is any library which is not built using Boost.Build ---
i.e. there's no corresponding main target. This, in particular, includes
C runtime (from my linuxish point of view).

> 2. Is this feature meant to express a preference or a hard
> requirement?

Preference. You must be able to set it globally, and not to fight
with libraries that are available in only one variant.

>>Maybe we need a completely different (ms specific) flag for this? 
>>After all, it's a problem that only occurs on windows platforms.
> 
> 
> The issue of link-compatibility between objects compiled for different
> runtimes only occurs on Windows, but the issue of whether to link to
> the static or dynamic runtime certainly comes up on other platforms.
> 
> I understand that eventually we need to deal with platform-specific
> needs, so I am certainly willing to consider this. However, I only
> want to go this direction as a last resort. An important design goal
> of Boost.Build is to be able to write "high-level" build
> specifications which mostly insulate the user from
> platform-/compiler-specific issues. If we can capture the "usual
> intention" of the user in asking for a static or dynamic runtime such
> that it chooses the right compiler option on Windows and does
> something else everywhere else, that's better.

Completely agree. In other mail, I'm asking some question about
static runtime usage on Windows that hopefully can help to
understand those "usual intentions".

- Volodya