Vladimir Prus wrote:
Per:
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2899
we have a problem that the default set of libraries build on Windows does not match autolink defaults, which causes confusion. In that issue, John say that the only sensible solution for Windows is to build all possible variants by default (IIRC, a total of 6). I would like other Windows developers to comment if that is sensible solution. In particular, is it best to build all possible variants that user might need, or build just the variants that autolink needs by default, so that user can build other later.
Note that I can add arbitrary explanation messages into the build process -- both to warn the user that a scary pile of things will be built, and to warn the user that only couple of variants will be built.
Thanks everybody for the feedback. I think that conclusions are: 1. Autolink defaults to static linking, and it's best if default build of Boost match autolink default, so I'll change Jamroot to build static libraries by default on windows. 2. IDE default is: runtime-link=dynamic, threading=multi, variant=(debug|release) and it's good to match IDE too. Therefore, on windows we'll build link=static runtime-link=dynamic threading=multi variant=debug Anybody thinks we should also build link=static runtime-link=dynamic threading=multi variant=release ? It seems reasonable if IDE creates release variant as well. However, if many users switch to static runtime anyway, maybe we should not waste time building two variants by default if user will switch away to something else. - Volodya