First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 127676
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: C++ Team <cpp@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Hanno Meyer-Thurow <h.mth@web.de>
Add CC:
CC:
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
STLport-5.0.2-boost.diff disable boost link, add extra cxxflags patch Hanno Meyer-Thurow 2006-03-26 15:52 0000 458 bytes Details | Diff
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 127676 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 127676 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug

Description:   Opened: 2006-03-26 15:01 0000 
Since STLport-5.0.2 there is a --with-boost configure option.
Please add a boost useflag. Or alternatively hardwire one way.
Thanks!

------- Comment #1 From Hanno Meyer-Thurow 2006-03-26 15:52:46 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=83198) [edit]
disable boost link, add extra cxxflags

Why I disable boost link?
I have a strange OOo2 issue which seems to be sourced from STLport<->Boost. I
will see after recompile of OOo2.

Why I tweak the CXXFLAGS thing?
It did not care for the extra CXXFLAGS before.

------- Comment #2 From Hanno Meyer-Thurow 2006-03-29 04:28:55 0000 ------- 
Ok, my OOo2 error is unrelated.
However, any reasons not to push into Portage?

------- Comment #3 From Mark Loeser 2006-04-08 20:59:00 0000 ------- 
Agreed, boost doesn't look too useful right now.  Thanks a lot.

------- Comment #4 From Hanno Meyer-Thurow 2006-04-09 03:42:58 0000 ------- 
Do I misunderstand something?
You say that boost does not look too useful right now but then you enable it in
the ebuild?
Shouldn't there be '--without-boost'?

------- Comment #5 From Mark Loeser 2006-04-09 12:10:17 0000 ------- 
Nope, I'm just an idiot.  thanks for catching that :)
First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug