Marco Donizelli wrote:
Hi there, when I built the 1_30_2 Python Library, I got:
libboost_python.so
now, with 1_31_0, I get several libs but that one:
libboost_python-gcc-1_31.a libboost_python-gcc-1_31.so libboost_python-gcc-1_31.so.1.31.0 libboost_python-gcc.a libboost_python-gcc-d-1_31.a libboost_python-gcc-d-1_31.so libboost_python-gcc-d-1_31.so.1.31.0 libboost_python-gcc-d.a libboost_python-gcc-d.so libboost_python-gcc-mt-1_31.a libboost_python-gcc-mt-1_31.so libboost_python-gcc-mt-1_31.so.1.31.0 libboost_python-gcc-mt.a libboost_python-gcc-mt-d-1_31.a libboost_python-gcc-mt-d-1_31.so libboost_python-gcc-mt-d-1_31.so.1.31.0 libboost_python-gcc-mt-d.a libboost_python-gcc-mt-d.so libboost_python-gcc-mt.so libboost_python-gcc.so
Unless I made a mistake in the building step which prevented
libboost_python.so
No mistake on your part.. that is the new build+install design.
to be created, the first solution that comes to my mind to solve this backward compatibility problem would be to create a symlink from libboost_python.so to one of the new libraries. The question is, what would you recommend:
libboost_python-gcc.so
or
libboost_python-gcc-mt.so
That depends on which previous version of libboost_python.so you want to be compatible with. Previously two versions still got built, both named the same, but in different directories. So which one are you referring to? The single threaded, or multi-threaded? And by the way just having the name match does not give you backward compatibility. The really important aspect is binary compatibility. For that you need to rebuild your modules+applications, as Boost/C++ doesn't really have a concept of binary backward compatibility. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq