On 20.06.2017 04:17, John Maddock via Boost wrote:
I also want to be able to pick my own build (etc.) tools, not in addition to Boost.Build, but instead of it. I understand that right now that's not supported, which is why I'm writing this proposal. What would it take for Boost to support individual libraries to be built with anything else ? What requirements would that "anything" have to meet, and how would it interact with the existing infrastructure to work ? Is that such a strange request ?
Absolutely anything at all?
(I'm not sure I understand what you mean. I'm specifically asking about requirements that would restrict that "anything". So no, not absolutely anything.)
You cannot do integration testing if every library uses something different. You can't even do a single build and install everything.
I think that's part of my point: At this point in time, who actually needs the entirety of Boost built and installed as a single entity, other than by habit ? There are so many different libraries, targeting different audiences. Is there anybody using all of them ? Would it really hurt anyone if they had to install Boost.MPI, Boost.Compute, and Boost.Python (to name a few domain-specific ones) separately ?
IMO there does have to be a common build system for that stuff (whatever that may be), if authors want to ship with some other build system as well, then that's just fine too.
John.
Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...