From: gmu (usrlocalinfo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-29 11:22:01
Daniel James wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>On Sunday 28 November 2004 12:58, Daniel James wrote:
>>>I don't think it currently offers any real advantage
>>>over just using it straight from the source so it might be best to just
>>>remove the package.
>>It would still be move convenient to
>> apt-get install boost-build
>>then doing manual unpacking.
> Yes certainly, I just meant for the original poster, since he's already
> unpacked it. It will be great if the build instructions for a
> boost-build package will just be: 'apt-get install boost-build && bjam'.
> Thanks for doing this, as a Debian user I really appreciate it.
I really love having the debian subdirectory available. It lets me
download bbv2, modify a couple things if desired, build a debian package
and deploy on multiple machines with minimal hassle.
If there was a stable/testing/unstable package for boost-build v2, then
this wouldn't matter as much but for now, it is very much appreciated.
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk