From: Konstantin Litvinenko (darkangel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-10 03:50:52
You wrote on Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:31:04 +0300:
VP> On Wednesday 04 January 2006 13:05, Konstantin Litvinenko wrote:
??>> But for borland 6.4 I got sys-bcb64-mt-d.lib
??>> which I found a little bit weird. I can fix this but I don't know what
??>> is the right fix :) I think sys-bcb6_4-mt-d.lib would be good version
??>> naming, but I'm not sure. Is this a bug or I'm missing something?
VP> Maybe I'm missing something too. Isn't "64" the same as you get from
VP> V1? I've just tried and the dot is indeed remove, and you get no "_"
VP> between major and minor version.
I don't use V1 since I got v2 :) I just proposed to use "_" to replace dots in version. Maybe we should leave dot, maybe not... I just don't like "64" or "71" or "33". sys-bcb6.4-mt-d.lib or sys-bcb6_4-mt-d.lib looks better then sys-bcb64-mt-d.lib, IMHO. I can write tagging rule for my own use, but boost libs will be named differently. And when someone ship out compiler with two digits in version numbers we will get something like "110". 10.1 or 1.01? No more information only code.
With best regards, Konstantin Litvinenko.
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk