Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [ot] choosing a build system
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-21 12:42:05

on Tue May 15 2012, Olaf van der Spek <> wrote:

> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Except that not all variants should be build on all platforms. Linux
>>> (probably) doesn't need the static ones. And on Windows you're missing
>>> the static runtime one.
>>> Your rules don't appear to take care of variant naming either.
>> Right.  And 90% of use-cases don't want to take care of any of those
>> things.  That's why we wrote the rules as we did.  Generating all the
>> possible variants of a library is a packager's job, not part of the
>> regular development workflow nor something that users regularly want.
> Right, that's my point. It'd be nice if CMake (upstream) supported
> this, then other C++ libs would benefit from it too.

Agreed. I hope that CMake (upstream) will take about half the work we
do for CMake support in ryppl. If you'd like to code up support for
this, we'd welcome your contribution.

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at