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

From: John Femiani (JOHN.FEMIANI_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-14 13:52:53

Roland wrote:
> 
> John Femiani wrote:
> > I propose what you suggested as a possiblility:
> >
> >    boost_xyz.dll 
> >    boost_xyz.dll.a (import lib)
> >    libboost_xyz.a (static lib)
> >
> >   
> Hmm, yes this should work. But what about compatibility to 
> other windows linkers?
> 
> Roland
> 

IMO Priority one should be with compatibility with the tool I used to
build the library. 
Pre 1.35 versions of boost use a .a as well, so the 'lib' extension for
boost from mingw must be a new thing, but I think it is a very good
feature.

Is this issue specific to mingw, or does it apply to cygwin's gcc as
well (or Interix, or whatever, if they are supported by boost?) 

Would it be acceptable if there were a different target or option to
generate .lib files with toolset=gcc, in addition to generating .dll.a?
Since xyz.lib has less priority than libxyz.a, adding a .lib won't cause
g++ to pick the wrong library with -lxyz. One would still need a .dll.a
version or else g++ would try to choose the static library even when one
wanted dyamic linking.

-- John