Boost!

Finally get myself Boost now that I have time to tinker again. Anyways, I'm sticking it on my Linux VM, performing an aptitude search leads to believe I want the libboost-all-dev package, is this correct?

EDIT:
As I haven't done much serious programming on Linux, I'm not sure where the best place to save the library would be, either. I've read that /usr/local is the place to use?
Last edited on
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
What distro are you using? If it's debian based then libboost-all-dev is what you want if you want *everything*, there are individual packages like libboost-thread-dev, libboost-asio-dev, etc...I usually just install the entire thing, personally.

If you're using your package manager to install it (which you should be), it'll probably put everything in the "right" place for you which I think is /usr/lib.
Last edited on
I just wget-ed the package off sourceforge. Currently I'm in my backtrack VM and unpacked it in /usr/local/boost_x_x_x

Should I continue with this or restart with the package manager?
Last edited on
You should always use the package manager unless you have very good reasons not to (for example, if the boost package version is too old for your needs).
Well I was going to actually but I ran into a seemingly never ending chain of dependency issues, so I gave up and downloaded the tar. Ill try the package manager again tomorrow.
Sounds strange. The package manager should install all dependencies, it's nothing you have to do yourself.
That's what I thought. It might have something to do with backtrack? I'm gonna try it on my Ubuntu vm and see how that goes.
Just remember that a lot of the useful boost libraries are now replaceable by c++11.

Before using a boost library, check that it's not available in c++11, otherwise you might just want to use C++11.

For example threads, chrono, ...

Here is another list some people made.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8851670/relevant-boost-features-vs-c11
Last edited on
The main feature I was looking at was the networking headers
closed account (iw0XoG1T)
I don't know why you are using Linux VM; but if it is because you believe it is easier than just trying to build it yourself on windows. Don't let the people here who post how hard it is to build and use scare you.

It is no harder to build and use then any other third party library and easier than most.

To tell the truth one of my biggest problems with building it was realizing how easy it was see this:

http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/80031/

and using gcc is the same on both Linux and Windows
Last edited on
I prefer working in Linux, I use a VM because I have windows-side applications I have to work with at the same time.

The package manager works on my Ubuntu VM at work, so I'm assuming the issue I had earlier is isolated to backtrack.

EDIT:
From reading the documentation, it says you don't need to build most of the boost library?
Last edited on
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
I have much less trouble building Boost with visual studio then any other build system I've tried.


I prefer working in Linux, I use a VM because I have windows-side applications I have to work with at the same time.


Why not use a Windows VM then?

The package manager works on my Ubuntu VM at work, so I'm assuming the issue I had earlier is isolated to backtrack.


Possibly. From my experience, Backtrack is mostly intended to be used as a live system to perform diagnostics, I've never really heard of anyone using it as a workstation.

From reading the documentation, it says you don't need to build most of the boost library?


Depending on what you want to use from it, you're right: a significant portion of Boost are templates.
Why not use a Windows VM then?

More of my work is on Windows, it's just easier to have Windows as the host and Linux as the guest. Plus at work I doubt they'll let me actually install Linux. AFAIK, my host/guess configuration isn't really at question here.

Backtrack is mostly intended to be used as a live system to perform diagnostics, I've never really heard of anyone using it as a workstation.


This is probably true, I only heard of it about a week ago. I just like the feel of it, it's very smooth. And I do a lot with networks so the access to practically every networking tool, built in, is pretty nice.
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
Fair enough.
@Resident which VM do you use?
VMWare player. Not sure that that would be the cause
Installing via the package manager should at the very least pull in the dependencies (provider the most recent boost doesn't require newer dependency versions) so you can build the latest boost.
@RB

I just thought that I'd mention that asio also comes in a non-boost flavor that is header-only if that's what your focus is. I can't say for sure, but I could wager a guess that the header-only asio is a little bit lighter than the boost variety (because of boost's interdependencies with boost::system and in some cases boost::regex, and/or boost::serialization, and/or boost::thread, and/or boost::date_time depending on what you're doing with it).
Hmm I didn't know this. I think I'm gonna look into this, would be easier and far more practical.
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.