<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Slava <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Viatcheslav.Sysoltsev@h-d-gmbh.de" target="_blank">Viatcheslav.Sysoltsev@h-d-gmbh.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im"><br></div>
You build 64-bit stuff (including boost if you wish) in 64-bit environment, 32-bit stuff (including boost if you wish) in a separate 32-bit environment. The environment is native for build tools, so you need no crosscompiling (-m32), no special library lookups. Google for 'linux 32-bit chroot' for more information.</blockquote>
</div><br>But then you need two compilation environment which not everyone can get (or be authorized to use in some companies).</div><div class="gmail_extra" style>My point is that there shouldn't be a need for this: you can already compile for 64 or 32 bit with your compiler, only boost lacks a way to find the right binaries.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style>I myself can't use another environment at the moment. And I don't want to, I need to work with a single laptop from everywhere and don't have space and patience for dual boot.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style><br></div><div class="gmail_extra" style>Joel Lamotte.</div></div>