Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost
From: paul (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-20 19:27:34
On Tue, 2017-06-20 at 21:58 +0300, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> paul wrote:
> > 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 singleÂ
> > > (usually in-house) build system.
> > I have not worked at a place that used a single build system. Nor doÂ
> > distros build like that.
> Ah, we're talking about different things then. You're talking about
> and shipping 10,000 libraries. I thought we're talking about building aÂ
> project with 10,000 dependencies.
Well, of course, projects are work on, I need to ship them.
> > Well, I guess I should switch from my "unmaintainable" OS to windows.
> That's just nonsense. The OS doesn't matter.
My OS is a large-scale build, which does not use a single build system.
> > >
> > > and errors are irreproducible.
> > This has not been my experience. I have found "irreproducible" errors(ieÂ
> > it shows on one machine but not the other), but this was due to differntÂ
> > kernel versions, which a single in-house build would've not fixed orÂ
> > helped either.
> Reproducible here refers to you get a bug report about build number 49121,Â
> but you're already on 56192 internally. You need to be able to rewind backÂ
> to 49121. The entire state of the project is a unit, you can't treatÂ
> dependencies as their own separate kingdoms which you build, "install", andÂ
> forget about.Â
If the dependencies are different between build 49121 and 56192, I would've
update CI scripts in the repo with the different requirements. Otherwise the
CI has no idea how to build it correctly. When I rollback to 49121, I just use
the CI scripts for that commit.