Re: [jamboost] boost.jam with/compatible with autotools

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-01 03:09:31

Hi Will,

> Boost.jam looks like my best choice for project management. My
> only concern here is delivery. Also note that I am not saying that
> using the full blown boost.jam build methods without any autotools is
> totally out of the question for delivery, but that would be REALLY
> hard to sell to my people. It's hard enough arguing to not rely on
> make.("What do you mean make isn't good for large projects; it's what
> they use for the Linux kernel...").
> I am spending a couple more days researching this, and I will post
> my conclusions, but opinions from this community would be appreciated
> as I continue to sift through this.

As far as autoconf is concerned, I see no reason why you can't use it 
together with Boost.Build, although I never tried this.

As for automake -- it's completely separate thing, and there's no code to
generate Makefile.am from Jamfile. I actually doubt such code is possible.

- Volodya

-- 
Vladimir Prus
http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com
Boost.Build V2: http://boost.org/boost-build2