Vladimir Prus wrote:
Neal Becker wrote:
The "official" Redhat/Fedora rpms for boost-1.32 had set soname as e.g.: libboost_date_time.so.1 instead of libboost_date_time.so.1.32
I guess that answers the question I had in the other thread. That's a mistake sure to lead to chaos. The default system layout build of BBv1 sets the soname to libboost_date_time.so.1.33.0 and my hope was that this would be used by the RPMs. But go figure that they would override that, it's the GNU way to impose their view on others :-( Yes, at minimum the soname should have "1.33" in it and the RPMs should be fixed. My preference is to have the full "1.33.0" in it, but I'm paranoid when it comes to version compatibility. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - Grafik/jabber.org