On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 03:14:05PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Roger Leigh, le Fri 03 Dec 2010 14:08:48 +0000, a écrit : > > While I do find this a rather annoying violation of encapsulation, > > you will find (e.g. with "nm -C -D") your binary will have > > boost::system symbols in it which are only satisfied indirectly > > via libboost_filesystem and which would result in breakage if > > libboost_filesystem drops that dependency and you don't explicitly > > link against it. Ideally, the headers should be fixed. > > Or simply the equivalent of pkgconfig's "Requires:" be used. > > You can't make all application know what headers are doing, since that > could change. pkg-config support for Boost is a long-standing issue. Unfortunately, there's no usable alternative that provides this information, TTMOBK. If there was, I'd not have to keep hacking my autoconf scripts to autodetect the magic combinations required to link, and it would make backporting and supporting a wider range of boost versions rather simpler. That said, the general issue isn't boost-specific; it will affect all code making direct use of indirect dependencies, where inline functions in headers are a good illustration of the problem. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Description: Digital signature