Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-22 18:14:12
On 22.06.2017 13:52, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
> I am assuming that any conversion of my library's bjam code to CMake
> should "just work",
> ie. there is somne sort of conversion facility ( or easy recipe ) from
> bjam to CMake that I can just run each time I make a change to the
> bjam files. If that is not the case, and I am expected to manually
> change CMake each time, I probably will not like such CMake support
> for end-users.
What I'm worrying about isn't so much whether any bjam->cmake conversion
can be automated or not, but how I will be able to help end-uses who
report error messages stemming from cmake. They will be as cryptic to me
as the b2 error messages, and require me to run the very command the end
user was using to attempt to reproduce and fix the issue. In other
words, it would require me to debug the cmake-based build system, not
the original one this was created from.
Don't fool yourself: whatever build system you hand your users, you
better be comfortable with yourself.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk