Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

Subject: Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update
From: Michael Jackson (mike.jackson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-31 18:00:23

On Oct 31, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Doug Gregor wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Michael Jackson
> <mike.jackson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 31, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Doug Gregor wrote:
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I am not sure of is what to do with the remaining headers  
>>>>>> in the
>>>>>> "boost" directory. Are those going to be the "core" of Boost or ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, that's how I would do it.
>>>>
>>>> So are talking about modularizing what is left into "libs/core"  
>>>> then? I
>>>> just
>>>> want to be really clear and certain before I make that move.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I was very unclear. I would like the remaining libs (mpl,
>>> type_traits, config, and whatever else is in that tangle)
>>> unmodularized for now. There *are* circular dependencies at the
>>> library level and they aren't trivial to untangle. It's better for  
>>> the
>>> CMake effort to leave those in the non-modularized core and let the
>>> library authors sort out the dependencies later.
>>
>>
>> How my working directory stands now is that all the libraries are
>> modularized.
>>
>> The problem I know have is that according to the generated  
>> dependency graph
>> there is only 1 circular between date_time, algorithm and regex.
>>
>> MPL, Type_Traits and such _seem_ to be ok but I think that is  
>> probably a
>> false report going on what you guys are telling me.
>
> If you enable testing, does "make check" run cleanly? On Mac OS X,  
> it should.
>
>  - Doug
>

make check
make: *** No rule to make target `check'.  Stop.

?
_________________________________________________________
Mike Jackson                  mike.jackson_at_[hidden]
BlueQuartz Software                    www.bluequartz.net
Principal Software Engineer                  Dayton, Ohio