Re: [boost] [cmake] Pull request announcement

Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Pull request announcement
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-09-27 03:21:21

> Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>
> > Indeed: While the above is a great starting point to support what I 
> > want, I don't want to loose the ability for BPL to be built (and tested) 
> > as part of the rest of Boost. I would thus prefer something that gives 
> > me the ability to choose the build strategy e.g. using some command-line 
> > option, including flag to be passed to the build (e.g., `b2 ... 
> > standalone=on`), rather than having to modify the (build) code.
>
> Scanning for Jamroot to identify the project root is fundamental to Jam 
> (the Perforce one). We could perhaps add something like
>
>     b2 --jamroot=.
>
> that would act as if there were an empty Jamroot at . (or equivalently if 
> the Jamfile at . were named Jamroot.)
>
> Apart from that, since the existing installations of Boost aren't modular 
> and are installed in the system-global directory /usr, there's not even 
> need to enumerate the dependencies accurately or to add an include path. 
> You could if you wanted to, I suppose. Python, specifically, only uses 
> header-only libraries, so you don't even need to bother with library 
> targets.

The only thing that will not work is this:

import ../../config/checks/config : requires ;

(https://github.com/boostorg/python/blob/develop/test/Jamfile#L7)