Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-04 17:18:43

On Oct 4, 2007, at 7:25 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:

> Douglas Gregor wrote:
>> On Oct 1, 2007, at 12:51 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>> In light of that, I think that the future of Boost.Build is a Python
>>> implementation.
>> When did it become acceptable for Boost's build tool to be written in
>> Python?
> Sorry for picking nits, but Boost's build tool is Boost.Build M12.
> When Python port is finished, we can separately discuss cost/
> benefit of
> using it for building Boost.

If the existence of a Python port means that the current bjam-based
version will no longer be supported by the few people who understand
it, then frankly Boost has no choice in the matter. We either move to
the Python port and accept it, or maintain a system that very few of
us understand, or we have to come up with a new build system for Boost.

Boost is completely dependent on Boost.Build, and decisions about
Boost.Build have a huge effect on Boost, good or bad. Boost is also
by far the largest and best-known user of Boost.Build, so it seems to
me that Boost's requirements should have some influence on the
direction of Boost.Build. No?

>> I love Python, but that's a rather large dependency for Boost to
>> have, given that many Boost users will have to build Boost from
>> sources.
> Err, larger that CMake?

Python + Boost.Build is larger than CMake, yes.

        - Doug

Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at