Subject: Re: [boost] Boost CMake support - Request for Comment
From: Roger Leigh (rleigh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-10 20:25:30
On 10/10/2018 16:02, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 10/10/18 1:24 AM, Roger Leigh via Boost wrote:
>> I think it's primarily useful for packaging standalone applications
>> where there are no complex library dependencies.Â Certainly for
>> Windows and MacOS X it makes sense.Â For packaging a set of libraries
>> like Boost, I don't think it's as useful;
>> we already have good Boost packaging anyway, so I'd suggest ignoring
>> it at least for now.
> Hmmm - what is "Boost packaging" refering to?
I was referring to the existing packaging for the various Linux
distributions, BSD ports, MacOS MacPorts/homebrew, vcpkg etc. I simply
meant that the problem is already taken care of by others for the most
part, and that CPack doesn't bring much (if any) added value on top of that.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk