Re[2]: [lmi] confused by latest expm1.c changes

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:03:39 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:

GC> I guess the problem is this lmi design decision:
GC> 
GC> # Treat certain external libraries as collections of source files to
GC> # be compiled and linked explicitly here, instead of building them
GC> # separately and linking them as normal libraries. Rationale:
GC> #
GC> # boost: the build system provided is not free.
GC> [and it's unique to boost AFAICT]

 I'm not sure about the source of this assertion, do you have any more
information about this? I thought that Boost Jam was distributed under the
same (very permissive but definitely free) Boost Software Licence as the
rest of Boost. And seeing that Debian has no qualms in distributing Boost
(including the libraries which require to be built) I'd be very surprised
if there were a problem here.

GC> Do you think it would be hard to autotoolize boost::filesystem so that
GC> we could use it as a shared library?

 No, it wouldn't.

 OTOH I did realize that my own suggestion to require 1.35 would be a
problem for the Linux builds: 1.35 is not even in Debian testing yet and
Debian stable only has 1.33, 1.34 is in testing (so I use it only in a
chroot as my main system is stable).

 So everything being said I think it could be simpler to just copy the 3
files boost/math/special_functions/{log1p,expm1}.hpp and details/series.hpp
to LMI source tree and simply use them.

 What do you think?
VZ