boost
 

All,

I thought I had moved boost 1.36.0 to testing already, sorry. I'll be
sending uploading it after I work out some SVN conflicts.

k

boost
 

K. Piche schrieb:

All,

I thought I had moved boost 1.36.0 to testing already, sorry. I'll be
sending uploading it after I work out some SVN conflicts.

k




This patch is still missing:
http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/attachment/ticket/1615/0001-date_time-gcc-4.3-fix.patch

boost
 

On Sun, 2008-09-21 at 19:40 +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> K. Piche schrieb:
> > All,
> >
> > I thought I had moved boost 1.36.0 to testing already, sorry. I'll be
> > sending uploading it after I work out some SVN conflicts.
> >
> > k
> >
> >
>
> This patch is still missing:
> http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/attachment/ticket/1615/0001-date_time-gcc-4.3-fix.patch

Just curious if this affect us? There are lots of patches for boost in
trac that haven't been applied yet.

k


--
K. Piche <kpiche@rogers.com>

Boost
 

Hi,

Does anyone know what's going on with boost? It seems it was downgraded
from 1.42.0 to 1.41.0 a while back, and hasn't been updated to the
latest 1.43.0.


I was going to build the latest on my machine, but if there's something
wrong with it I might hold off or go with the older version. I know
there was some talk about splitting it up; is that the reason?


Daniel

Boost
 

On 18/06/10 16:24, Daniel Bumke wrote:

Hi,

Does anyone know what's going on with boost? It seems it was downgraded
from 1.42.0 to 1.41.0 a while back, and hasn't been updated to the
latest 1.43.0.

I was going to build the latest on my machine, but if there's something
wrong with it I might hold off or go with the older version. I know
there was some talk about splitting it up; is that the reason?



From memory 1.42 broke encfs. The encfs developers blame boost, the
boost developers blame encfs, so nothing was done in recent updates from
either side.


So we either update boost or break encfs...

Allan

Boost
 

On 18/06/10 13:30, Allan McRae wrote:
From memory 1.42 broke encfs. The encfs developers blame boost, the
boost developers blame encfs, so nothing was done in recent updates
from either side.


So we either update boost or break encfs...
Thanks for the tip! Presumably you mean either we *don't* update boost
or break encfs?


What a mess. For anyone interested you can read up on it here:

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=92209
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/3990
http://code.google.com/p/encfs/issues/detail?id=60

Boost really seems to have no interest in fixing this, but it looks like
encfs may have found a work-around (the bug above was closed yesterday
with status 'released'). Latest encfs release:
http://code.google.com/p/encfs/updates/list


Maybe worth another try with the new encfs version?

Boost
 

On 06/18/2010 09:30 AM, Allan McRae wrote:

On 18/06/10 16:24, Daniel Bumke wrote:

Hi,

Does anyone know what's going on with boost? It seems it was downgraded
from 1.42.0 to 1.41.0 a while back, and hasn't been updated to the
latest 1.43.0.

I was going to build the latest on my machine, but if there's something
wrong with it I might hold off or go with the older version. I know
there was some talk about splitting it up; is that the reason?



From memory 1.42 broke encfs. The encfs developers blame boost, the
boost developers blame encfs, so nothing was done in recent updates from
either side.

So we either update boost or break encfs...

Allan


encfs devs released a new version which works with > 1.41.

yesterday i built 1.43 but the splitting is holding me back. It has a
very annoying build system and until now we have in the bugtracker one
which is copying files around from a directory to another. FS#19749


--
IonuÈ›

Boost
 

On 18.06.2010 11:38, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> On 06/18/2010 09:30 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> On 18/06/10 16:24, Daniel Bumke wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Does anyone know what's going on with boost? It seems it was downgraded
>>> from 1.42.0 to 1.41.0 a while back, and hasn't been updated to the
>>> latest 1.43.0.
>>>
>>> I was going to build the latest on my machine, but if there's something
>>> wrong with it I might hold off or go with the older version. I know
>>> there was some talk about splitting it up; is that the reason?
>>>
>>
>> From memory 1.42 broke encfs. The encfs developers blame boost, the
>> boost developers blame encfs, so nothing was done in recent updates from
>> either side.
>>
>> So we either update boost or break encfs...
>>
>> Allan
>
> encfs devs released a new version which works with > 1.41.
>
> yesterday i built 1.43 but the splitting is holding me back. It has a
> very annoying build system and until now we have in the bugtracker one
> which is copying files around from a directory to another. FS#19749
>
What's the issue here though? We have a working split package and
everyone is happy? Bjam is a crappy build system but until CMake is more
actively maintained by Boost (last boost-cmake release was 1.41) it'll
have to do. Boost is an important part of C++ development, it should not
go without update in Arch.

-- Sven-Hendrik

Boost
 

On Fri 18 Jun 2010 11:52 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On 18.06.2010 11:38, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> > On 06/18/2010 09:30 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> >> On 18/06/10 16:24, Daniel Bumke wrote:
> >>> Does anyone know what's going on with boost? It seems it was downgraded
> >>> from 1.42.0 to 1.41.0 a while back, and hasn't been updated to the
> >>> latest 1.43.0.
> >>>
> >>> I was going to build the latest on my machine, but if there's something
> >>> wrong with it I might hold off or go with the older version. I know
> >>> there was some talk about splitting it up; is that the reason?
> >>
> >> From memory 1.42 broke encfs. The encfs developers blame boost, the
> >> boost developers blame encfs, so nothing was done in recent updates from
> >> either side.
> >>
> >> So we either update boost or break encfs...
> >
> > encfs devs released a new version which works with > 1.41.
> >
> > yesterday i built 1.43 but the splitting is holding me back. It has a
> > very annoying build system and until now we have in the bugtracker one
> > which is copying files around from a directory to another. FS#19749
>
> What's the issue here though? We have a working split package and
> everyone is happy? Bjam is a crappy build system but until CMake is more
> actively maintained by Boost (last boost-cmake release was 1.41) it'll
> have to do. Boost is an important part of C++ development, it should not
> go without update in Arch.

Wow, this is kind of depressing. Why would some package in community
block an established library from being upgraded in extra?

Boost
 

On 06/18/2010 01:56 PM, Loui Chang wrote:

On Fri 18 Jun 2010 11:52 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:

On 18.06.2010 11:38, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 06/18/2010 09:30 AM, Allan McRae wrote:

On 18/06/10 16:24, Daniel Bumke wrote:

Does anyone know what's going on with boost? It seems it was downgraded
from 1.42.0 to 1.41.0 a while back, and hasn't been updated to the
latest 1.43.0.

I was going to build the latest on my machine, but if there's something
wrong with it I might hold off or go with the older version. I know
there was some talk about splitting it up; is that the reason?


From memory 1.42 broke encfs. The encfs developers blame boost, the
boost developers blame encfs, so nothing was done in recent updates from
either side.

So we either update boost or break encfs...


encfs devs released a new version which works with> 1.41.

yesterday i built 1.43 but the splitting is holding me back. It has a
very annoying build system and until now we have in the bugtracker one
which is copying files around from a directory to another. FS#19749


What's the issue here though? We have a working split package and
everyone is happy? Bjam is a crappy build system but until CMake is more
actively maintained by Boost (last boost-cmake release was 1.41) it'll
have to do. Boost is an important part of C++ development, it should not
go without update in Arch.


Wow, this is kind of depressing. Why would some package in community
block an established library from being upgraded in extra?



until now yes, from now own NO. :D

expect new boost in testing + todo today

--
IonuÈ›