Subject: Re: [boost] Directory structure not quite right yet?
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-06 10:56:50
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Peter Dimov <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> * The directory structure installed by a Boost Package Manager, i.e. bpm.
>> The introduction of a new modular way to install Boost is the ideal time to
>> introduce a new install directory structure. Now. Not later. Don't release
>> bpm for production use until we are happy with the directory structure it
>> will install.
> The problem here is obviously that the version of Boost.Build installed by
> bpm would need to support the new directory structure. When the two
> structures (source tree and bpm) are the same, or supported by the same
> Boost.Build, the package script can just "tar cf build.tar.lzma tools/build/
> Jamroot boostcpp.jam libraries/Jamfile.v2" from the source tree, and call it
> a day. But if the bpm structure requires a custom version of Boost.Build,
> (a) the package script would have to do more work and (b) this custom
> version of Boost.Build will need to be tested separately. In the same
> structure case, the packager may (reasonably) assume that Boost.Build has
> already been tested.
I'm hoping that Boost.Build itself is the same for either distribution
directory structure, and that the only thing that differs
<boost-root>/Jamroot and perhaps some of the other <boost-root>
scripts. Maybe the differing files could like in a different boostorg
repo or a different boostorg/boost branch.
> PS: Beman, you have an open pull request in system for meta/libraries.json.
Grrr... I need a little app that will look at GitHub on some schedule
and tell me if there are any outstanding pull requests in any of my
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk