Re: [boost] [cmake] Where to discuss CMake in Boost?
On 23 March 2018 at 10:37, Paul A. Bristow via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Mateusz Loskot via Boost
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018, 00:13 P F, <pfultz2@yahoo.com> wrote:
I was completely unaware of the boost-cmake ML
It seems a bit hidden from the front page, one has to browse lists.boost.org for full list of MLs.
A bit of judicious selective cross-posting to the user or developer lists might bring progress (or snags) with Cmake to a wider public?
Valid point. I understand that may be the case indeed. OTOH, I think, the CMake has become a delicate topic in Boost. Every time I want to ask about any kind of use of CMake in Boost, I fear that will make the snowball rolling down the hill, again :) For instance, I wish Boost offered CMake support library, review eg. BCM and let it in. I'm not speaking of building Boost with CMake, no! I mean joint development of support scripts for Modern CMake which are useful for those Boost library developers who wish to add CMake configuration (along the official BB2), for convenience. I think such bunch of Boost for CMake scripts would foster better common practices. Currently, there is bunch of CMake-enabled libraries, each developed in isolation, each using different conventions, techniques, custom macros, modules. Lately, I was adding CMake setup for Boost.GIL. It made me wondering why the BCM thing is not in boost/tools/bcm. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Mateusz Loskot via Boost Sent: 23 March 2018 13:22 To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Mateusz Loskot Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Where to discuss CMake in Boost?
On 23 March 2018 at 10:37, Paul A. Bristow via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Mateusz Loskot via Boost
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018, 00:13 P F, <pfultz2@yahoo.com> wrote:
I was completely unaware of the boost-cmake ML
It seems a bit hidden from the front page, one has to browse lists.boost.org for full list of MLs.
A bit of judicious selective cross-posting to the user or developer lists might bring progress (or snags) with Cmake to a wider public?
Valid point. I understand that may be the case indeed.
OTOH, I think, the CMake has become a delicate topic in Boost. Every time I want to ask about any kind of use of CMake in Boost, I fear that will make the snowball rolling down the hill, again :)
For instance, I wish Boost offered CMake support library, review eg. BCM and let it in. I'm not speaking of building Boost with CMake, no! I mean joint development of support scripts for Modern CMake which are useful for those Boost library developers who wish to add CMake configuration (along the official BB2), for convenience. I think such bunch of Boost for CMake scripts would foster better common practices.
Currently, there is bunch of CMake-enabled libraries, each developed in isolation, each using different conventions, techniques, custom macros, modules.
Lately, I was adding CMake setup for Boost.GIL. It made me wondering why the BCM thing is not in boost/tools/bcm.
Of course, those who developed the b2/bjam build system are committed to 'their baby'. And they are also *entirely busy* with the really vital task of keeping our current build and test system going. This is why *they* are just not able to contribute much to CMake. (No time for snowballing rolling either ;-) Another 'Band of Brothers' must get CMake working, and your suggestions below sound a good starting step to 'get the ball rolling' - uphill! Good luck! Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830
[I'm attempting to set replies to boost-cmake@lists.boost.org; we'll see if it works or if the list software rewrites my header.] In article <CABUeae_NH8TsFRPYOhKjjrS=6BqOfuoG=HCp4N0TmryGeCxA2g@mail.gmail.com>, Mateusz Loskot via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> writes:
For instance, I wish Boost offered CMake support library, review eg. BCM and let it in. I'm not speaking of building Boost with CMake, no! I mean joint development of support scripts for Modern CMake which are useful for those Boost library developers who wish to add CMake configuration (along the official BB2), for convenience. I think such bunch of Boost for CMake scripts would foster better common practices.
OK, I'd consider myself moderately familiar with CMake, but by no means an expert. However, when I read the above paragraph, I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you be more specific? -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://ComputerGraphicsMuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://LegalizeAdulthood.wordpress.com>
On Mar 23, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Richard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
[I'm attempting to set replies to boost-cmake@lists.boost.org; we'll see if it works or if the list software rewrites my header.]
In article <CABUeae_NH8TsFRPYOhKjjrS=6BqOfuoG=HCp4N0TmryGeCxA2g@mail.gmail.com>, Mateusz Loskot via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> writes:
For instance, I wish Boost offered CMake support library, review eg. BCM and let it in. I'm not speaking of building Boost with CMake, no! I mean joint development of support scripts for Modern CMake which are useful for those Boost library developers who wish to add CMake configuration (along the official BB2), for convenience. I think such bunch of Boost for CMake scripts would foster better common practices.
OK, I'd consider myself moderately familiar with CMake, but by no means an expert. However, when I read the above paragraph, I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you be more specific?
I think he is talking about installing usage requirements(ie confi.cmake file or pkgconfig files). Or perhaps he is referring to the general utilities it provides for setting up tests among other things? Paul
On 24 March 2018 at 03:10, P F via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On Mar 23, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Richard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
[I'm attempting to set replies to boost-cmake@lists.boost.org; we'll see if it works or if the list software rewrites my header.]
[Looks like the latter. I CC'ed this response of mine to boost-cmake@lists.boost.org to leave trace of this thread (https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2018/03/241796.php) in the archive there]
In article <CABUeae_NH8TsFRPYOhKjjrS=6BqOfuoG=HCp4N0TmryGeCxA2g@mail.gmail.com>, Mateusz Loskot via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> writes:
For instance, I wish Boost offered CMake support library, review eg. BCM and let it in. I'm not speaking of building Boost with CMake, no! I mean joint development of support scripts for Modern CMake which are useful for those Boost library developers who wish to add CMake configuration (along the official BB2), for convenience. I think such bunch of Boost for CMake scripts would foster better common practices.
OK, I'd consider myself moderately familiar with CMake, but by no means an expert. However, when I read the above paragraph, I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you be more specific?
I think he is talking about installing usage requirements(ie confi.cmake file or pkgconfig files).
Or perhaps he is referring to the general utilities it provides for setting up tests among other things?
Currently, I mean the latter - during my initial attempts aimed to allow use of CMake Boost.GIL development, building tests and examples, etc. I also guess if there is common CMake scripts module, then libs/hof doesn't have to maintain local copy of BCMTest.cmake libs/callable_traits doesn't have to write macro callable_traits_append_flag libs/hana also doesn't have to write macro macro setflag and peraps host copy of CheckCxxCompilerSupport.cmake Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
participants (4)
-
Mateusz Loskot -
P F -
Paul A. Bristow -
Richard