From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-21 12:03:44
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> libboost_program_options-gcc-1_35.so (symlink to the above)
If that last one is not a symlink, then that's a bug in BBv1.
> I gather that the different scheme with Boost might be related to lack of
> binary compatibility between versions, but was this an explicit decision?
Yes it was an explicit decision right before the 1.33.1 release. The
emails archives should have the discussion. But I don't remember which
list it was on.
> Should we raise raise the question about binary compability betwen 1.N.M and
> 1.N.(M+1) on the devel list?
Search the archives ;-)
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo
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