From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-04 14:33:39
----- Original Message -----
> > I guess easing the bootstrap process must be another one.
> Yes, though a good set of directions would be enough. As much of a
> pain as it was to deciphere the short path, if explicit directions
> had been given on how to bootstrap Jam I still could have done so in
> under 5 minutes. As it was, it was more like 45 minutes because of
> the trial and error involved. Frankly, some users would probably
> never figure it out.
Sure. I think we could probably make a .bat file that wraps theirs to do it
> > BTW, once bootstrapped, I have not had any long-pathname problems
> with Jam.
> I've just tested your example Jam files and find this to be the case
> for me as well. It looks promising. What I'd like to do is write a
> Jamfile for Boost.Threads as a real world example of the Boost.Build
> system, but I frankly have no idea what I'm getting myself into
> there. I may send you some (private) e-mails asking questions if I
> get stuck.
However, I think a slightly wider audience will be interested. I usually
prefer to do these things out in the open, on the boost list, as you never
know who will be lurking and might want to jump in and contribute. Unless
there's an outcry, let's do it right here. If/when that happens, we can
establish a small private email group.
> However, I think Boost.Threads is a complicated enough
> build system to be a good trial, while not being too large to manage
> yet, and since it's not in CVS it's safe from effecting any Boost
> releases. Any thoughts on this?
Fortunately, a build system can be constructed for /anything/ without
interfering... but I welcome users at this point, and Boost.Threads is as
good a place to start as any other.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk