Subject: Re: [boost] To modularize, or not to modularize. What is the plan?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-05-07 13:55:01
On 5/6/19 11:15 PM, Gavin Lambert via Boost wrote:
> There's no particular reason why a b2 build couldn't do the same thing
> -- in fact it probably already does.
Right - that's what "b2 headers" does. b2 headers creates a structure
of links which maps the original to that which the user uses. But this
is not a good match for users needs. And users don't want to have to
deal with b2. This is why my proposal doesn't added any new burden to
> So whenever the user runs the "get me a Boost library" command (whatever
> that turns out to be) it probably has to run a b2 build anyway, so that
> will just happen.
I'm not seeing this at all. I don't think any solution which requires a
user to download, build and execute b2 is going to fly.
>>> I don't see why it would need to be any more complex than downloading
>>> the existing Boost superproject root and doing the equivalent of "git
>>> submodule update --init" on only the specified submodules, then
>>> running a b2 build/stage cycle (modified to cope with missing modules).
>> Some would disagree with you.
> To clarify, I don't mean that "regular users" should have to do a full
> git clone (if they wanted one, they could already do that).Â But there
> are ways to tell git to only download a specific tree without any
> history, or to just use snapshot archives instead of using git itself.
Hmmm - I can't understand all that the above does and how it does it.
I would hope it would be easy to invoke: Get me boost library X and
place in directory location Y. This would boil down to invoking a git
clone and making the translation from the boost development tree to the
simpler tree structure that users currently get.
If there is git command that can do this- great! Please post it here.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk