Re: [Boost-users] Include boost in software distribution?

From: Joseph Turian (turian_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-29 10:41:28

Point being, I don't want someone not to use my software because they're 
(justifiably) daunted by the prospect of installing the entire Boost 
distribution. Rather, I want to make the build process as simple and 
flexible as possible.

Ideally, my software should be sufficiently idiot-proof that anyone could 
untar the package, issue a single command ('./build.sh'), and get a clean 
complete build without doing any else, even if they don't have Boost 
installed.

On 7/29/05, Christian Henning <chhenning_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> Why not give them a binary?

Because I don't know what platform they're on.
I'm sure you can think of other reasons why distributing binaries is 
dispreferred.

If this doesn't work, than try a script
> that executes the bjam compiling only the program_options, which I
> believe also need the biggest lib of boost, serialization.

Although 'program_options' depends upon quite a few headers, I tried it out 
and---if I'm not mistaken---you can build and link it into code using just 
the source files in program_options/. No serialization code is necessary.

Also, potential users of my software may not have bjam installed. I'm trying 
to eliminate as many hurdles for the end-users as possible.

Thanks,
Joseph

-- 
http://www.cs.nyu.edu/~turian/