Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] [ot] choosing a build system
From: Nathan Ridge (zeratul976_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-08 18:54:54


Hello,

I am developing a new C++ library (unrelated to Boost) and I need
to choose a build system for it.

I had originally planned to use Boost.Build, because I figured that
it would be particularly suitable for a C++ library, and because
I've come to associate Boost with high quality and excellence.

However, recently I've heard talk of Boost switching its own build
system from Boost.Build to CMake (in fact, the currently active
thread about modularization suggests that this change is imminent).
My understanding is that Boost is the primary user of Boost.Build,
and therefore I am concerned about what this switch means for the
future of Boost.Build.

Do you think choosing Boost.Build as the build system for a project
is still a sound choice, or am I better off choosing something else
like CMake?

More generally, what build system would you recommend for a C++
library?

My requirements for the build system are the following:
  - straightforward support for multiple variants of the build
    (32-bit vs. 64-bit, debug vs. release, static vs. shared, etc.),
    including coexistence of multiple variants on the same machine
  - general ease of use (for the library writer and library users)
  - suitability for a C++ project
  - cross-platform, FOSS

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Thanks,
Nate
                                               


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk