On 20.02.2014 10:32, Michael Fritscher wrote:
>
>> On 20.02.2014 05:06, Michael Fritscher wrote:
>>>
>>> Another problem is in my oppinion the library-hell problem. ROS packages
>>> are tightly tied with specific library version (e.g. libboost) which
>>> (roughly) exists only on one specific distro-version. This
>>> makes it almost inpossible to use binary versions of ros on another
>>> distros. Perhaps this can be solved that the binary packages depend on
>>> e.g. "libboost-1.42 | roslibboost-groovy" - so either the
>>> distro-version or a ros-own version can be used.
>>
>> @Michael Fritscher
>>
>> Afaik boost does neither guarantee ABI nor API compatibility for (minor)
>> releases.
>> Therefore asking for that "feature" for ROS is just unrealistic and your
>> proposed way of an alternate Debian dependency is just not going to work.
>
> Why does the way of an alternate dependency not work? ;) In my proposed
> way either the distros version of libboost, if it fits, or a own-built
> version from ros will be used. We could completely get rid of the distros
> version and always use our own version of boost, if that is easier ;)
Because any other library version of Boost than the one used for building the binary in the first place will not work.
(And if it would work then you are just really lucky that incompatibilities in the ABI do not hit you.)
Cheers,
- Dirk
_______________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
(text/plain)