<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Ingolf Steinbach <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ingolf.steinbach@googlemail.com">ingolf.steinbach@googlemail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
2009/9/18 Bill Hoffman <<a href="mailto:bill.hoffman@kitware.com">bill.hoffman@kitware.com</a>>:<br>
<div class="im">> If someone has a reasonable set of places to look we can add them. Does the<br>
> boost installer set any registry values?<br>
<br>
</div>Not sure about that. Unfortunately, there is no installer for 1.40.0<br>
yet; and 1.40 seems to be somewhat different than previous releases --<br>
at least with respect to library naming.<br></blockquote><div><br>Thankfully, the changes made to library naming in 1.40 do not break FindBoost. :)<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
My intention was: there are already some typical paths hard coded in<br>
FindBoost. When the module finds that one of those paths does exist in<br>
the file system, would it be possible to search that path a bit harder<br>
(for instance evaluate subdirectories) for the requested Boost<br>
version?<br></blockquote><div><br>Could you post what you have in mind for the paths?<br><br>Also, bear in mind that Boost already encodes versions into the include directory and libraries. It isn't necessary to segment a boost install prefix by version number at all.<br>
<br>Ultimately we can add anything to the search path of FindBoost that makes sense. If you have suggestions, please feel free to submit them (preferably with a tested patch) to the bugtracker.<br><br></div></div>-- <br>
Philip Lowman<br>