From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-22 03:05:04
On Monday 21 April 2008 12:35:49 John Maddock wrote:
> Patrick Frants wrote:
> > Not 100% sure whether this list is also about the usage of Boost.Build
> > in Boost...
> > I would like to have my application with both "address-model=64" and
> > 32
> > bits dlls in the same directory under Windows. Unfortunately the
> > address-model is not one of the components of the Boost library
> > filenames constructed in boost\config\auto_link.hpp.
> > Is this a recognized issue within the Boost user community? Is there
> > any consensus on how to handle such a situation (separate 32/64 bit
> > directories or changing auto_link.hpp to take into account more
> > dimensions)?
> As far as auto-linking is concerned it would be an easy change to make to
> add in a 32/64 suffix as required: but we need to decide on a naming scheme
> first and implement it in Boost.Build.
This is not hard, and I'm sure you can do it. What concerns me that the further
drift between Boost naming scheme and established schemes on Linux. There's 32-bit
and 64-bit libraries, IIUC, are not decorated in a special way -- they are placed
in different directories.
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