Subject: Re: [boost] Boost CMake update
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-04 17:45:53
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Stefan Seefeld via Boost <
> On 04.10.2017 13:22, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
> >> For one, I didn't mean to re-open a discussion about separating release
> >> cycles. I merely wanted to point out a limitation in the existing
> >> Boost.Build logic, and how I hope that any future build system will
> >> support stand-alone builds, so further modularization can at least be
> >> considered and experimented with.
> > Not entirely sure what you are referring to... But B2 doesn't have such a
> > limitation. So perhaps I missed something something.
> Perhaps b2 the tool doesn't have such a limitation, but b2 the boost
> build infrastructure does, given that it's impossible to build library
> Boost.X stand-alone, i.e. without starting from the superproject repo.
> I'm pretty sure that could be fixed quickly for someone with the
> required knowledge, but right now that's not a supported workflow.
True. Although the existing infrastructure can be made to be modular
non-intrusively. As I did for the conan modular packaging.
> Anyhow, I'm sorry this went off a tangent. My original point was to
> suggest that CMake (or any other future Boost build system) should
> support modular builds, rather than expect Boost.X and Boost.Y always
> have the same version, or be part of the same source tree.
Couldn't agree more :-) And if that is a key requirement for the next build
system it should be explicitly considered as such in future deliberations.
-- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk