Re: file vs. project hierarchy

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-29 16:12:00

sheila miguez wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:27:37 -0900, David Abrahams
> <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> 
>> sheila miguez wrote:
> 
>> > Am I
>> > constrained in how I organize my directory structure?
>> 
>> I don't think so.
>> 
>> > Is the toplevel
>> > jam file the only one that depends upon file structure?
>> 
>> I don't think it depends upon file structure either, but maybe you have
>> something specific in mind that I missed?
> 
> At this stage I am still ignorant enough that I probably didn't state
> my question clearly, and I'm the one who missed something instead of
> you.
> 
> I'm mixed up thinking about how bjam creates a map of the dependency
> space (or the project space?), and of how it transform an element in
> conceptual space onto the location in the physical space.

If you slog through the thread at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.build/5864
you will see that currently,

/foo/bar//baz

references a target baz in a project with absolute symbolic ID

/foo/bar

(always, I think) and

foo/bar//baz

references a target baz in a project at relative directory

./foo/bar

and that symbolic project IDs are arbitrary and don't have to have any
relationship to directory structure. You assign absolute IDs using the
project rule, and that's that.

> I'm trying to convert a big project over from our current primitive
> build process to a bjam process. Our file structure is as follows:
> 
> /repos
> /repos/proj1
> /repos/proj2
> /repos/proj3
> ....
> 
> projN will have sub projects, etc.
> 
> The build process I have to work with for now is rooted in
> 
> /repos/proj1/install/
> 
> which operates on everything. I don't like that, and want to relocate
> it. I'm not sure if I am constrained by bjam conventions in where I
> may locate it. 

What is "it?" A process isn't normally spoken of as being rooted in a
directory.

> I was reading through the online appendix and in
> <http://www.boost.org/doc/html/bbv2/arch/targets.html#bbv2.arch.depends>
> it reads,
> "NOTE: THIS SECTION IS NOT EXPECTED TO BE READ! " and later, " The
> remainder of this document is not indended to be read at all. This
> will be rearranged in future."
> 
> er... Does this mean the section is inaccurate, organized poorly,
> and/or merely not a compulsary read?

I have no clue, but I will be requesting that Volodya strike the
material until such time as he can write something useful to others there.

> btw, is it better for me to work from a build made with CVS source instead?

Depends on your goals. The CVS source is less stable, but it usually
has some bug fixes and improvements over the latest release (and
sometimes some new bugs, too ;->).

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com