Subject: Re: [boost] [release] 1.69.0 deadline for new libraries approaching
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-23 03:02:21
On 10/22/2018 7:55 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>> Robert Ramey wrote:
>> > On 10/22/18 10:19 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>> > > Marshall Clow wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> * 24-Oct: Boost 1.69.0 closed for new libraries and breaking changes
>> > >
>> > > OK... do we want CMake config files installed by 1.69 or not, then?
>> > I'd like to know this as well.Â If so, I presume that we can
>> consider > the Boost/CMake issues resolved and we can just move on
>> from this?
>> I doubt it. The CMake issue is much bigger than this.
> To expand on that:
> The Boost/CMake issues concern four scenarios:
> 1. CMake users who want to use a pre-built Boost from CMake, after
> installing it either with `b2 install`, as usual, or via some other
> 2. CMake users who want to use Boost (or an individual Boost library)
> from CMake without building it with b2 and installing it, but as a
> subproject, built by CMake;
> 3. Building and installing Boost with CMake, replacing the current
> Boost.Build building/installing infrastructure;
> 4. Testing Boost with CMake, replacing the current Boost.Build testing
5. Building a library's documentation with CMake. Quite a number of
libraries currently use the Quickbook -> Boostbook -> html/pdf cycle
with built-in support by Boost Build for this with a jamfile.
> Installing CMake config files as part of `b2 install` falls into
> scenario number 1. Boost is still built with Boost.Build as always, it's
> just that in addition to libboost_foo.a, the user also gets
> libboost_foo.cmake, which allows him to do `find_package(boost_foo)`
> from his CMakeLists.txt file. Nothing more than that. This doesn't
> affect, doesn't target, and doesn't address, scenarios 2-4 at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk