Re: [boost] New boost packaging suggestion for windows

Subject: Re: [boost] New boost packaging suggestion for windows
From: troy d. straszheim (troy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-05 10:47:30

Eric Niebler wrote:
> Steven Watanabe wrote:
>> troy d. straszheim wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:08 PM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
>>>>> I'm hoping Troy can give us a public report on the modularization 
>>>>> effort.  Troy?
>>>
>>> I suppose a picture is worth a thousand words:
>>>
>>>   http://sodium.resophonic.com/boost/boost-dependencies.jpg
>>>
>>> Please stop reading now and look at that.  Look for cycles and
>>> dependencies that don't seem to make sense.
>>
>> I actually don't see /very/ much there that doesn't make sense.
> 
> I do. Why does spirit depend on xpressive? Why does xpressive depend on 
> intrusive? And why *doesn't* proto depend on mpl? These are just the 
> first three things I checked. :-P
> 

I removed the modularization targets from cmake a while ago as they were 
causing confusion, trashing people's source directories, and I'd given 
up on solving this problem alone.  You may see bugs.  So use wave to 
write a program that generates this graph directly from the header files 
instead of from handcoded module.cmake files.

-t