dolfin team mailing list archive

["Johannes Ring" <johannr@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, June 24, 2009 14:48, Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Thu, June 18, 2009 10:07, Johannes Ring wrote:
>> On Thu, June 18, 2009 01:30, mspieg wrote:
>>> 	B) I've rebuilt boost (1.38 and 1.39) by hand just fine, but in
>>> general, there are a lot of possible variations on the naming of
>>> boost libraries (e.g. the default naming conventions for the
>>> libraries can include version and  compiler information such as
>>> libboost_program_options-xgcc40-mt.dylib).  It would be useful if
>>> the boost package generators were a bit more thorough in determining
>>> how to call things (maybe a bit of glob would help).
>>
>> Yes, the Boost pkg-config generator could be more robust. I can take a
>> look at it later.
>
> I have looked at this now and I think it would be a mess to add support
> for all possible naming variations of the Boost libraries. I think a
> better approach is to suggest for people building Boost from source that
> they build Boost with the --layout=system option. This way the names of
> the Boost libraries does include the Boost version and the compiler
> version.

Sorry, there is a missing 'not' in the above sentence. It should read:

This way the names of the Boost libraries does not include the Boost
version and the compiler version.

> Also, the header files are installed under $BOOST_DIR/include
> instead of $BOOST_DIR/include/boost-x_y.
>
> Johannes
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DOLFIN-dev mailing list
> DOLFIN-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
>