I apologize for missing the announcement. I'm guilty of filtering out most of the stuff that doesn't pertain to my application :) SMP is a very good thing. My question was mainly if this was an accidental dependency, did we really want to be using non-mainstream software in the core, but obviously this is a worthwhile endeavor.
Thank you for the time. Eric Blossom wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 08:50:26PM -0500, Brett L. Trotter wrote: > >> I may be mistaken, but when I last svn updated off the trunk, boost >> 1.35+ was required. This is not yet in the Fedora repositories (1.36 >> beta is in development however) and means building gnuradio with a >> standard system is not possible. While one can find the 1.36 src rpm and >> build it, it's a bit of a hassle. I updated the trunk not expecting any >> major changes in the last week-ish and now have to make it work. Is >> there anything truly requiring 1.35? If not, 1.33 would be much preferred. >> >> > > I announced more than 2 weeks ago that boost 1.35 was going to be > required, and that then was a good time to do something about. > > Directions on building from source are in README.building-boost. > It takes about 5 minutes to build the part we need, and it can coexist > with the already installed version. > > And yes, we need it. I didn't just randomly introduce what I know to > be a problematic dependency. Do you want SMP support? :-) > > If this is inconvenient for you, there are two other options: > the 3.1 stable branch or the tarballs. > > $ svn co http://gnuradio.org/svn/gnuradio/branches/releases/3.1 > > > Meanwhile, we're charging ahead on the trunk! > > Eric >
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
