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