Boost logo

Boost-Build :

Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Python port development
From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-09 10:05:30

On Friday 09 July 2010 17:47:45 Artyom wrote:

> > > And for all those reasons the CMake build system was implemented for the
> > > boost project. It is done, works and is proven.
> >
> > ... and unmaintained? And because it's unmaintained, it's not even possible
> > to prove that cmake gets the same test results on all targets. Yeah, proven
> >;-)
> >
> > Also, most of the concerns about the language listed above equally applies
> > to CMake -- it has crazy language that has no use whatsoever outside cmake.

> I still do not support BBv2 for Boost.Locale even in the release for review for
> one simple
> reason - there is no even way to do something like find_library, or find_path.

Just to clarify -- is this the only feature that you thing is not satisfactory
supported in Boost.Build?

> Maybe BBv2 somehow suits needs of Boost library as it trys to be self-containing
> but it
> does not suits needs of libraries that do use 3rd part tools, and this is going
> to increase
> as more libraries are developed and put in Boost.
> So yes, you can develop a "perfect" build system that would not have crappy
> language
> like CMake has, be fast, efficient and make a coffee for you,
> but it will take years of hard work to make it as stable and useful as CMake or
> autotools are
> today.

This is FUD, sorry.


Vladimir Prus

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