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
> 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
This is FUD, sorry.
-- Vladimir Prus http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com Boost.Build: http://boost.org/boost-build2
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