Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:38:10 +0300 From: "Alexander Churanov" <alexanderchuranov@gmail.com> To: pav@freebsd.org Cc: Simon Barner <barner@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: STILL OPEN: ports/129226: update devel/boost from 1.34.1 to 1.37 Message-ID: <3cb459ed0901111038k6b290194k949e43d96a822092@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1231629954.10829.0.camel@hood.oook.cz> References: <3cb459ed0901091434y3ec4cb5cr56bf358b527515d7@mail.gmail.com> <1231602062.44156.28.camel@hood.oook.cz> <3cb459ed0901101407m2c72487aqf35ea2c81761290e@mail.gmail.com> <1231629954.10829.0.camel@hood.oook.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2009/1/11 Pav Lucistnik <pav@freebsd.org> > > That's certainly a possibility -- but can two boost versions coexist in > a single system? > That's a real problem. To my mind there are no problems for shared libraries, but for header files the suggested solution would require placing headers under /usr/local/include/boost-134/boost and modify all ports' build processes to include /usr/local/include/boost-134 in a search path. I'll carry out this experiment. Another thing I've heard about port versioning is that Gentoo Linux handles different versions of the same port installed on a system. Probably, it's a good idea to examine how they do that slotting. Sincerely, Alexander Churanov
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3cb459ed0901111038k6b290194k949e43d96a822092>