#47811: boost: use system layout instead of tagged layout --------------------------+-------------------------- Reporter: mjpost@… | Owner: ryandesign@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: boost | --------------------------+-------------------------- Comment (by ryandesign@…): Replying to [comment:4 mjpost@…]:
Yes, with my change, you'd only be able to have a single version of the libraries installed at a time (at least, under /opt/local/{lib,include}).
More than that: we would not be able to give the user the option to change their boost installation in any way. If we were to implement your proposed change where e.g. libboost_program_options.dylib is the multi-threaded library, then we would not be able to give the user an option that would cause libboost_program_options.dylib to be the single-threaded library, because that would break any other ports in MacPorts that link with that library, because those other ports could have been built on our automated build server which would have boost installed in its default configuration (i.e. per your proposal libboost_program_options.dylib would default to being multi-threaded). Again, if nobody would ever want to use the single-threaded libraries, then we could make this change. And that's a possiblity: as you mentioned, the only way currently to get MacPorts to build the single-threaded libraries is to deactivate the no_single variant which is on by default. Since our build server only builds default variants, and since the MacPorts dependency engine does not have the ability to declare dependencies on variants of a port, there is probably no port in MacPorts today that requires the single-threaded boost libraries. But it's possible some user has software built outside of MacPorts that uses MacPorts boost's single-threaded libraries. It would probably be a lot of work to make this change, for a small gain in convenience and a small gain in simplifying the port. But the way the boost port currently works predates me taking over as its maintainer so I'm not totally informed on the reasons for it working the way it currently does and am therefore reluctant to make major changes. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/47811#comment:5> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X