From: Doug Gregor (dgregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-02 13:07:36
On Apr 2, 2007, at 12:22 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Doug Gregor wrote:
>> Yes, it probably would be advantageous to have a single-entry-point
>> layout, but we haven't found a good way to do it. svn:externals was
>> one potential approach, but they aren't quite powerful enough to do
>> what we need.
> svn:externals would be useful to make sandbox projects appear as
> full boost versions (plus the new bits) to the user.
Except that you can only use svn:externals for *directories*, not for
individual files. So, for example, while I could use svn:externals to
bring in directories like "boost/mpi" and "libs/mpi", I could not use
them to bring in "boost/mpi/mpi.hpp". I've looked into svn:externals;
either I missed something big, or they just aren't sufficient to do
what we want.
> Why not simply
> treat the two (main boost, and sandbox) as separate ? All it should
> take to build something against the two is an additional set of
> paths (-I and -L), which should be easily hackable into the build
We are treating them as separate, but mirroring the layout.
> The same strategy would be useful to build individual boost libraries
> in stand-alone mode, i.e. against all dependencies pre-installed.
> (See the discussion on boost modularity.)
Only if it's a strategy that works. svn:externals don't do that. Do
we have something else?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk