Subject: Re: [boost] CMake - one more time
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-04-20 18:33:02
> 4- It is in fact - I believe - possible to do a "cd doc; make" with
> CMake, but not from the source tree,
I believe that thatis what've done with the safe numerics library.
> So what I do now is also that: I am maintaining my CMakeLists.txt, for
> the purpose of having a proper development environment, but it has no
> other purpose at all. Also I have to say that it does not work well with
> this horrible "b2 header": in my cmake, I am hitting the headers of the
> library (in libX/include), and not of the main superproject. My IDE
> shows me 2 different files because of that.
I don't have this problem - I just use the cmake command - include
directory to refer to the include files of the library I'm working on.
As far as CMake is concerned, the superproject doesn't exist. When I
switch to boost build to run comprehensive tests while I take 10 hours
off to catchup on my sleep - it creates the headers it needs I think
automatically. Or maybe I run b2 headers before I launch it. Now I
> I do not like the current state of b2 for many reasons (even though I
> think it could be really a good build system), but CMake is not covering
> many features that are currently required by the boost superproject.
> Until the point where we can consistently build the lib (including the
> possibly many flavor of the same library - STATIC/SHARED at the same
> time, etc),run the tests, and generate the documentation (including the
> possibility to have the boostdoc/quickbook/doxygen toolchain),
I should say that my boost build does all those things. My complaint is
a) It's harder to setup than I would hope it to be.
b) Once set up, it's pretty reliable. But when it breaks it's an easter
egg hunt to make it work again.
> I do not see any *good* reason to move to cmake.
I'm not proposing abandoning support for CMake. I'm proposing that we
officially tolerate the existence of CMake files in boost projects -
perhaps with some restrictions.
> I have to say this does not scale at all, especially wrt.
I think that boost works better as a "federation" rather than a
"republic". Our loose rules have permitted things like quickbook to be
born in the first place. We'll never agree on certain things:
a) this topic
b) a documentation system
c) other stuff.
We just keep moving on.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk