From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-25 11:07:52
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
>> Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>>> troy d. straszheim wrote:
>>> In boost itself libraries live next to each other (in terms of file system
>>> layout). Thus, a sandbox project could be looked at as a single library stored
>>> 'out-of-place'. The build system should support referring to an existing
>>> boost tree for the 'official boost' dependencies, such that the sandbox
>>> project only needs to provide new or updated files, but not a whole copy
>>> of boost-mainline.
>> This is a huge problem with the current sandbox organization. After spending
>> a couple hours the other day trying to get boost.build to work in the sandbox
>> tree I gave up in frustration and had to copy sandbox directories into my
>> boost tree to use bjam. This is very annoying to say the least.
> Is this a boost.build limitation ?
> What's the proper way to fix that ?
It sounds like the sandbox libs will eventually become branches of the main
repository, so that would entrench the practice of embedding these libraries
into an existing tree. Personally I'd prefer to have something where I can
keep a pristine distribution and then add new libs by having them in their own
tree -- something like:
But to build and run the tests/examples in these 'one library trees' means
that you'd need to have a way to specify the base distribution to the build
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk