Boost compilation problem

[Christian Stimming]

Zitat von Derek Atkins <warlord at mit.edu>:
> This works well because generally code that targets an older version of
> a dependency will usually still work when compiled against a newer
> version of that dependency.  So if we target version 1.48 of libFoo it
> will generally still work with version 1.50 of libFoo that another user
> has.
>
> Doing it this way makes it easy for users to build gnucash; they don't
> have to figure out how to install "newer" dependencies on their systems.

That's the correct explanation of the thought process of how we chose  
boost-1.48 as target. However, I see two issues here: Firstly, as  
Aaron figured out, newer distros (with newer gcc's which have newer  
warnings) won't even build with the old target boost anymore.  
Secondly, I think we're overrating the fact that *users* might want to  
*compile* gnucash for themselves and need to have it easy to do so. I  
mean, this small minority of people who compile gnucash from source  
can also be asked to compile boost from source. IMHO there's almost no  
difference between the set of people who can compile gnucash from  
source, and those who can compile both boost and gnucash from source.

I think we should still take the distro issue into consideration, but  
can decide on a compromise between our developers' convenience (it's  
us who do the work, anyway) and the dependency restrictions. In case  
of boost, IMHO as Aaron told us, 1.48 doesn't even compile anymore  
with current gcc and is therefore a nuisance to be used by us  
developers. We should lift this up to some newer version, such as 1.52  
or 1.56, whatever will be out on the market for 6-12 months at the  
targeted stable release date. But I think any extra effort to get  
boost-1.48 compile with our up-to-date build systems is rather wasted  
and should better be invested somewhere else. Boost-1.52 plus/minus  
one is my proposal.

Regards,

Christian