Incompatible change to Boost library names

2009-08-30 Thread Roger Leigh
Hi, Boost used to contain regular library names without an -st or -mt suffix to indicate building for single- or multi-threaded use. Boost 1.57/58 (if not earlier) switched to only providing libraries with an -mt suffix. This was fine, but did mean as an upstream I was required to patch my

Re: Incompatible change to Boost library names

2009-08-30 Thread Andreas Barth
Hi, thanks for notifying us. * Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [090830 11:09]: /usr/share/doc/libboost-program-options1.39-dev/README.Debian still lists '-lboost_program_options-mt' as the name to use, however. Is this change intentional, or just a bug in the 1.59 packaging? Does this

Re: Incompatible change to Boost library names

2009-08-30 Thread Steve M. Robbins
Hi folks, I apologize for the mess. On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 02:04:18PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: Hi, thanks for notifying us. * Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [090830 11:09]: /usr/share/doc/libboost-program-options1.39-dev/README.Debian still lists '-lboost_program_options-mt'

Re: Incompatible change to Boost library names

2009-08-30 Thread Roger Leigh
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:59:35AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 02:04:18PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: * Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [090830 11:09]: Is this change intentional, or just a bug in the 1.39 packaging? Does this retain or break

Re: Incompatible change to Boost library names

2009-08-30 Thread Andreas Barth
* Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [090830 19:13]: On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:59:35AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: I'm open to suggestions. Perhaps the best way forward is to re-introduce an -mt variant name as a symlink to the non-mt name. If that's agreeable, I'll get it done today.

Re: Incompatible change to Boost library names

2009-08-30 Thread Steve M. Robbins
Hi, On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 07:18:22PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: * Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [090830 19:13]: On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:59:35AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: I'm open to suggestions. Perhaps the best way forward is to re-introduce an -mt variant name as a