Re: [boost] Re: Why Jam?

From: Iain.Hanson_at_[hidden]
Date: 2002-02-22 13:38:28

     Right now, boost does not have an installer as has been mentioned by 
     many others on this thread.
     
     If an open source library wants to use boost then it will either need 
     to hand install it ( not a big problem ) or creat a platform 
     installer.
     
     The recent failures reported on here ( including your own ) were 
     caused by bugs in the libraries. The fact that jam goes on to build 
     all the targets it can is IMO a good thing (TM). If as a developer, 
     you can't re-direct stdout and stderr or scroll back up throough your 
     xterm's output to find error messages then I'm not sure the tag 
     "experienced developer" would apply.
     
     Like Bill Kempf, I had nothing to do with developing boost::build and 
     managed to get it going when it required bootstrapping. As a 
     replacement for make, it is far supperior IMO. Unlike Bill, I'm a 
     boost newbie having only been hanging out here for about six months.
     
     BTW ./configure followed by make install would fail on 99% of the 
     systems I have worked on for 99% of the opensource software I have 
     ever used. The default dir for install is /usr/local which is normally 
     owned by root. And I rarely have root access.
     
     learning to use jam is no more difficult than learning to use 
     ./configure
     
     However, yes we do need an installer.
     
     /ikh

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Why Jam?
Author:  r-smith (r-smith_at_[hidden]) at unix,mime
Date:    22/02/02 17:30

bill_kempf wrote:
> 
> I don't disagree.  There was a bit of humor in what I said (see the 
> winky?).  However, the consumers of Boost are developers and should 
> be able to easily deal with the installation of headers.
     
This is not true.
     
Boost becomes part of the required source code for any project that uses 
it. If the project is distributed in source form, anyone who installs it 
has to install Boost too, just like they have to install any other 
library the project depends on. For other libraries that's not a 
problem, because we can count on them being available in autoconf and/or 
rpm form.
     
There's nothing so convenient for Boost. The current Jam-based install 
system is a bad joke; I'd bet money that nobody but Bill and the handful 
of others who developed it and know it intimately has ever got it to 
work. My attempt to run it recently resulted in page after page of error 
messages and nothing remotely resembling a working system, and I've seen 
similar reports here from others. If even experienced developers can't 
get it to work, end users haven't a chance.
     
In its current form, Boost is completely unusable for open source 
projects, because the end user has no way to install it. (I take it as 
axiomatic that anything more complicated than "./configure && make 
install" or "rpm -Uvh boost.rpm" is functionally equivalent to Doesn't 
Work. If you disagree, then we're clearly living on different planets 
and further discussion would be a waste of time.)
     
Is there any chance that Boost's install system will ever actually 
_work_, for a reasonable variety of systems?
     
-- 
Ross Smith ...................................... Auckland, New Zealand 
r-smith_at_[hidden] ......................... http://storm.net.nz/~ross/
  "We need a new cosmology. New gods. New sacraments. Another drink."
                                                       -- Patti Smith
     
Info: http://www.boost.org  Send unsubscribe requests to: <mailto:boost-unsubscr
ibe_at_[hidden]> 
     
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
     
     
Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com
This message contains confidential information and is intended only 
for the individual named.  If you are not the named addressee you 
should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.  Please 
notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this 
e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free 
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, 
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.  The sender therefore 
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents 
of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.  If 
verification is required please request a hard-copy version.  This 
message is provided for informational purposes and should not be 
construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or 
related financial instruments.