> Why specifically asio and nothing else? Because it's the only one we need that's set up this way. Not all boost libraries are set up this way, for example boost-json already has a pre-built shared library (and no header-only option). I don't know if there are any other libraries that are set up this way, but if there are, then people who need them can add them.
> If we want to build bits of boost as shared libraries where upstream only > supports them as header-only libs, then there should be a general solution, > and ideally one that is accepted upstream. This is the solution that's accepted upstream. Boost-asio is header-only by default for people who don't need a shared library. But it officially supports the BOOST_ASIO_DYN_LINK flag for dynamically linking to a shared library that we have to build ourselves, and they intentionally don't build that shared library since it's not needed by default. Making these changes upstream would require everyone who uses boost to build the boost-asio shared library whether they need it or not, which would be wasteful. Note that my change doesn't require all openembedded users to build the shared library, it's still possible to use the boost recipe without the boost-asio recipe and get the header-only version of boost-asio without the shared library. The point in making these changes here is that users can decide whether they want to use the header-only version or the shared library by using the correct recipe. ________________________________ Från: Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]> Skickat: Onsdag, 02 september 2026 13:59 Till: Gustav Lindberg <[email protected]> Kopia: [email protected] <[email protected]> Ämne: Re: [OE-core] [PATCHv6] boost-asio: Add recipe [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] On Wed, 2 Sept 2026 at 10:38, Gustav Lindberg via lists.openembedded.org <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is needed to build boost asio as a shared library rather than a > header-only library, which is needed to save memory. Why specifically asio and nothing else? If we want to build bits of boost as shared libraries where upstream only supports them as header-only libs, then there should be a general solution, and ideally one that is accepted upstream. I think you need to discuss with boost upstream first before proposing something custom for core. Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#244997): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/244997 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/121047998/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
