From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-04 13:02:57
On Oct 3, 2007, at 8:08 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Douglas Gregor wrote:
>> Our CMake-based build system for Boost is a lot more than "debug" and
>> "release", which is pretty obvious to one who has read the
>> documentation for it. Did you even look at the CMake-based build
>> system documentation I linked to?
> Yes, did you look at Boost.Build docs?
Yes, I've read them completely, and spent many hours digging through
the BBv2 source code to extend it. I implemented the original
BoostBook toolchain in BBv2 and more recently the MPI toolset. I'm
not making suggestions as some naive user who took one look at BBv2
and threw up his hands to say "use my pet project."
> Does you system supports all Boost.Build
> features? Does your system support all features the current
> build of Boost has?
The answer to both is "many, not all." Does Boost.Build support all
features of CMake? No. There's a big overlap in the feature sets:
CMake is missing some that the current Boost.Build has, and
Boost.Build is missing some that the current CMake has.
> Boost.Build has some problems, and some of the problems can be solved
> by using pre-existing solutions. However, judging those solutions
> from "can build C++ Boost and has larger community" standpoint is not
> sufficient. Another important factor is how that other solutions are
> compatible with Boost.Build design and ideas. And on that grounds,
> I'm not looking into using cmake. OTOH, Python looks like good
> and immediately useful pre-existing solution.
Then go for it. Time will tell whether this rewrite will be as easy
as you think and provides the benefits you expect.
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