Re: [boost] Best Practices Question: Building, Installing, and Using Boost in Corporate Environments

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-24 13:49:09

Christopher Woods writes:
> Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> > IMHO this is a general issue: how do you manage a third-party library
> > sources in presence of a need to make local patches to them, and keep
> > these patches from getting overwritten accidentally? (Unless you
> > always work with the HEAD / latest & greatest sources _and_ have a
> > direct channel to the library maintainer, local patches are
> > inevitable).
> >
> > Our answer to this question here at work is: 
> > 
> > 1) Always maintain a patch directory alongside with the root
> >    directory for the library sources, e.g.:
> > 
> >        boost_root/...
> >        boost_patches/...
> > 
> > 2) Make the patch directory precede the original sources in the
> >    list of include paths. Do this and #1 at the very moment you
> >    import the library in your repository.
> > 
> 
> I think I see the merit to this option verses having only the
> boost_root committed to the repository and applying patches
> directly.  With only the boost_root, it would quickly become
> impossible to discern what was patched previously and whether or not
> that patch needed to be carried forward to the next version/release
> of the library.

Yep. Well, not literally impossible, but way too painful and
error-prone.

> > 3) When a need for a patch occurs:
> > 
> >    a) Isomorphically copy the affected / add the new files into
> >       the patch directory, leaving the originals untouched, and
> >       patch the copies. If you need to delete the file, don't,
> >       but, depending on the use case, override it with an empty
> >       one or the one containing an #error directive / redirecting
> >       #include.
> >
> 
> In the rare case that you have to patch a .cpp file (as most
> libraries are only headers) do you mean that you are updating the
> original file to be just a shell that #includes the modified
> version?  Or are you modifying the library's bjam to use the file
> from the patch directory? 

The latter, after copying it over to the patch directory.

> >    b) Rebuild the library if needed (making sure to enforce #2).
> > 
> > 4) When upgrading to a new version of the library, diff the patches
> >    against the new originals and delete/keep/adjust them depending on
> >    the results.
> >
> >HTH,
> 
> Yes - it certainly does!  You completely covered my first two
> questions.  If you don't mind me asking, do you also push into the
> repository the [few] libraries built with whatever compiler(s) you
> use?

On Windows, yes. On Mac OS X, they are built locally on each
developer's machine as a part of a project's build process, but that's
more a historical artifact than anything else.

-- 
Aleksey Gurtovoy
MetaCommunications Engineering