Re: [boost] [build] b2 help moving disjoint_sets

Subject: Re: [boost] [build] b2 help moving disjoint_sets
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-04-26 19:27:48

AMDG

On 4/26/19 1:06 PM, James E. King III via Boost wrote:
> I have merged disjoint_sets into boostorg/graph locally and submitted
> a pull request for it (https://github.com/boostorg/graph/pull/169).
> The build jobs are failing however, due to disjoint_sets already
> existing and already having links:
> 
> https://ci.appveyor.com/project/jzmaddock/graph/builds/24131163/job/uguk1lir4yl7aaj3
> 
> b2 headers
> Performing configuration checks
> 
>  - default address-model : 32-bit
>  - default architecture : x86
>  - symlinks supported : yes
> error: Cannot create link boost\pending\detail\disjoint_sets.hpp to
> libs\graph\include\boost\pending\detail\disjoint_sets.hpp.
> error: Link previously defined to another file,
> libs\disjoint_sets\include\boost\pending\detail\disjoint_sets.hpp.
> 
> Command exited with code 1
> 
> This happened for me locally when I did the work, so I removed it from
> the superproject locally, and deleted disjoint_sets locally.
> 
> Any thoughts on how I can tell the build to ignore disjoint_sets so it
> can install the headers from the new location and complete?  This is a
> temporary situation until the superproject is updated, but the
> superproject cannot be updated until the code is merged into graph,

This two changes should really be handled together.
If they aren't applied atomically (git doesn't really
handle this situation well), then having the builds
fail until the situation is resolved is as it should be.

> and the builds are all failing so I cannot prove to the graph
> maintainers that the pull request is viable.

Excessive reliance on CI is getting in your way here...

>  The only way I can see
> around this is to rename the disjoint_sets headers from pending and
> into graph, and then fix up graph and graph_parallel, but my intention
> was to just merge the header into graph, not to change the location of
> delivered headers.  That said, getting something out of pending is
> always a good thing.  Any other ideas?
> 

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe