From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-10-11 02:32:27
>>Well you know my point of view. Boost Users should be able to build
>>boost at their site with a minimum of hassle. If the installation is not
>> configure ; make ; make install, it should at least be as simple.
>>Including the jam-executable in the boost download package helps to make
>>local installation simple.
> I agree with you completely. I am only unsure of these things:
> 1. Whether it should be in CVS or available elsewhere (e.g. do we want to
> distribute HP/UX executables to Windows users?)
> 2. Whether now is the appropriate time to check it in.
> 3. Where it should go. I'm thinking tools/build/bin/<platform>...
It would be perfect if the executables for every platform are a seperate
module in the CVS and thus can be selected by the boost cvs users
explicitly. But indeed, if it's a subdirectory of the boost project, you
will get all of them when you checkout boost.
The root of the problem can also be traced back to the tools directory
being located inside boost (although there's no other option). When
using boost.build for my project too, I want to use the exact same tools
directory. Thus in some way, this tools-directory is not project specific.
A dirty solution is to put every executable on a different branch.
Another solution is to offer them on the website.
The main thing is that we should know how the other users are handling
jam. Some might know what should be done in the Jam Makefile before
starting compiling but most won't (and they should'nt).
So we should know : have most users already installed Jam ? If so, did
they encounter problems or found it cumbersome, ...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk