Subject: Re: [Boost-build] New docs: Go or no-go?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-27 23:21:39
On 2/27/18 2:10 PM, Alain Miniussi via Boost-build wrote:
> Kludgy enough that I've never been able to generate the doc on my
> development machine. I stopped trying a couple of years ago. Now I need
> to go back to it, can't even remember where to start.
I faced the same problem. My solution was to just figure it out from
scratch. I created some simple shell scripts do do the job and have
been quite pleased with it. I noted down how I did it in the boost
library incubator website and used it to make the safe numerics library
documention. This is done using boostbook but without b2.
> So it is kind of difficult to appreciate points a-g (which could be
> valid and seems pretty important).
Exactly true. Faced with this problem, I worked around it as described
>> But moving to something else is just going to substitute a new set of
>> problems for the current ones, and inhibit progress toward a
>> collaborative solution.
> Well, if the new problems are not boost-only non C++ problems, that
> would already be an improvement.
> Are they ?
LOL - since I bit the bullet and made it work, I haven't had to actually
confront the problems with the alternative. But I did look at
alternatives and my main concern was they they don't decouple content
from the formatting so it's hard to make a tweak and have the effect
The main problem was editing the DocBook / BoostBook "source" text. For
me this was addressed by using XMLMind. Apparently Rene has a different
solution. And for other boosters, quickbook seems to do the trick.
>> Robert Ramey
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
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