Rene Rivera <grafik.list@redshift-software.com> wrote:
Walter Landry wrote:
Rene Rivera <grafik.list@redshift-software.com> wrote:
1. Nobody has volunteered the time and expertise to support such a system.
You must have missed the enormous flamewars when people suggested using autoconf. For example
No I didn't didn't miss it. And if you had read that thread you would have seen my replies in that thread for example:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/63354
Given the response, I am not surprised that there is no autoconf support in Boost.
Is that "not surprised" because of my response or the thread you referenced?
Because of the general hostility shown towards autoconf in that thread (and this one). It certainly does not motivate me to work on an autoconf'ing boost. Even so, I just realized that there is some support for autoconf in boost (in libs/config), but it is incomplete. <snip>
If people are willing to devote some effort we'd welcome what I would consider the optimal solution of just: "install". Which would use a system similar to the Linux Kernel configurator of providing a UI, graphical or curses, to select parts to install, to build, and to install.
I don't need that much. Just "configure; make; make install".
For that we could just shell scripts at the boost root with:
This doesn't do any configuration. You need the configure step to run libs/config/configure and copy user.hpp to the right place. You also need configure to handle things like PYTHON_ROOT. Finally, it doesn't handle install. If you work out all of those things, then I will be happy. Cheers, Walter Landry wlandry@ucsd.edu