Re: [boost] Why Jam?

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-20 08:48:01

I suppose we ought to make a FAQ page about this. You can find the answers
by searching the yahoogroups archives for autotools, automake, etc.

Some relevant links:

http://www.boost.org/tools/build/build_system.htm#design_criteria

The thread starting here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/message/22677

The thread starting here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/message/9568

----- Original Message -----
From: "kral123" <kral123_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 2:45 AM
Subject: [boost] Why Jam?

> I'm still struggling with getting Jam to build what I need of boost,
> trying to figure out how it reports errors (it just ignores them?),
> trying to figure out what it actually did, what libs it created, why
> it didn't produce .lib files for the thread stuff, etc..  What I want
> to know is, why not GNU autotools?  It seems like autoconf+automake
> would be much better suited to this job.  The system tests that boost
> needs to make have already been implemented in it or with existing
> autoconf m4 files, it works with significantly less hassle across the
> platforms boost supports, it runs on and supports more platforms than
> Jam, and everyone is already familiar with it.
>
>
>
>
> Info: http://www.boost.org  Send unsubscribe requests to:
<mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>