Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost

Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost
From: paul (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-20 18:31:43

On Tue, 2017-06-20 at 20:58 +0300, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> paul wrote:
> 
> > 
> > At 10000+ you are dealing with at least 5 different buildsystems:Â 
> > autotools, cmake, b2, meson, and qmake.
> Absolutely not. Everyone on this scale builds everything with a single 
> (usually in-house) build system. 

I have not worked at a place that used a single build system. Nor do distros
build like that. I am not saying it isn't done, just that it is not so common
as you say.

> The alternative is completely 
> unmaintainable, 

Well, I guess I should switch from my "unmaintainable" OS to windows.

> and errors are irreproducible. 

This has not been my experience. I have found "irreproducible" errors(ie it
shows on one machine but not the other), but this was due to differnt kernel
versions, which a single in-house build would've not fixed or helped either.

Furthermore, tools like conan provide reproducible builds, but does not use a
single build system either. So I dont think a single build system is always
required for reproducible builds.