Re: [Boost-users] [general] boost 1.35.0 library naming and bjam arguments priorities

From: Roland Schwarz (roland.schwarz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-12 08:29:59

John Femiani wrote:
> Why not?  What if shared & import libraries (in general) were placed in
> a different folder? 

Yes, this would obviously work. But this would require a change of the
layout for all other compilers too. It is just that boost has decided
on the naming convention some time ago.

...

> WRT a concrete examples; I guess my problem was not convincing enough.
> We shall see if somebody else complains soon. I think that 
> 
>      $ g++ foo.cpp -dn -lxyz 
> 
> fails to locate the static lib on windows with the current names, which
> seems like a bug.

Sorry, if this is intended as an example what is -dn used for then:
>            -dn
>            -fdump-rtl-rnreg
>                Dump after register renumbering, to file.147r.rnreg.
I cannot easily see how this flag affects our discussion.

Then in your example you do not specify if you want the static or the
dynamic lib. You just say: take whichever is found in the path, yes?

> Requiring -llibxyz works but has a smell, 

Yes the smell of working on windows.

> and it gets
> smellier when you try do it from SCons (I wonder what happens with
> CMake?) 

I don't know enough of SCons: does this mean SCons cannot handle library
naming that is common on windows?

> The worst thing is that -lxyz works, it just doesn't do what you
> think.  

So please tell me what I think ;-)

Btw.: This is why I tried to read the manpage about gcc and ld very
carefully to understand link search order. (I posted the summary
already in a related post.)

> At the least, _I_ did not expect the lib would be necessary, and
> nor did the build tool I used, and if I had not caught it then I would
> have only found out about my problem when I tried to install my program
> on a new machine without the dll (too late IMO).

So far you have not come up with a alternative suggestion that would
1) work
2) do what you expect
3) is compatible with current boost usage.
4) does not break my builds

Btw.: As I started to use mingw with boost it didn't work at all.
What I did: learned to understand boost-build, learned to understand
ld and mingw and came up with a solution after having it discussed
with the writer of boost-build.

Well my solution surely is not the only one possible, and I am sorry
if it introduced unmanageable problems for you. But then this is
open source: what hinders you to make it better?
Of course I would not be very happy if you break something for everybody
else (including me ;-)

Roland

-- 
_________________________________________
  _  _  | Roland Schwarz
 |_)(_  | aka. speedsnail
 | \__) | mailto:roland.schwarz_at_[hidden]
________| http://www.blackspace.at