From: Toon Knapen (toon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-16 02:38:37
Ronald Garcia wrote:
> kv> There is a free tool called autoconf to assist one in the
> kv> creation of such scripts. This stuff can run on Windows as
> kv> well, if you have the Cygwin tools installed.
> Just wanted to go on the record about configuration issues. To state
> my biases ahead, I develop primarily under Unices (Solaris and linux),
> so I'm used to installing/developing applications that use the gnu
> autotools (autoconf/automake/libtool). I have done a bit of toying
> with Macintosh CodeWarrior, but my own lack of knowledge regarding
> automating builds on Mac quickly discouraged me (my current assumption
> is that I'll be able to use Unix tools once MacOS X comes out).
> One of my strongest opinions about builds is that gnu autotools
> (autoconf/automake/libtool) are NOT a solution. On this list and
> other places, I frequently hear the pearl "well, with cygwin you can
> use autoconf under windows." In some circles, this is the right
> solution for configuration and build. I don't believe that Boost is
> such a circle. My reasoning is that the scope of boost greatly
> exceeds that group of C++ developers who are likely to tolerate
> dependence upon Unix tools in a non-unix environment. I feel that
> boost is attempting to target the greater C++ community, regardless of
> operating environment, and such a bias would be poor judgement on our
> I have to admit that I'm skeptical about the development of a good
> cross-platform build system, but at the same time I would greatly
> appreciate it if someone would prove me wrong (I feel this way not
> because I think it's impossible in the literal sense, but I doubt the
> commitment to the HARD work involved in developing and subsequently
> maintaining such a system).
There is a greate project/competition underway about improving
configuration-, build-, test- and bugtracking tools.
It's too late to join the competition but we could start from there
instead of starting from scratch.
> Until such a system is made available, I think that a reasonable
> solution would be to have package maintainers for different
> architectures. I've at least seen discussion here regarding the
> development of RPM's for linux, and with the current Boost release we
> have parallel .tar.gz and .zip releases.
I mainly work on Unix but have to port my tools also to windows.
However bringing the project/workspace files in sync with my
makefiles is a real pain.
However, someone of Microsoft even told me that they use makefiles
Some functionality gets lost however in VC++ but it
unifies the system.
However, I would only see this approach as temporary since windows
users would prefer working with projects and workspaces.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk