On 08/28/18 12:45, degski via Boost wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 12:28, Olaf van der Spek via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

...

Actually the best way is to use vcpkg if possible (IMO).

Concur, stop your head-aches and use vcpkg, problem over.

AFAIK, vcpkg is MSVC-specific. Not all Windows users use MSVC.

On 08/28/18 13:18, degski wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 13:14, Andrey Semashev via Boost mailto:boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

AFAIK, vcpkg is MSVC-specific. Not all Windows users use MSVC.

Did you fact-check that assertion?

Yes, Visual Studio is listed as a prerequisite here: https://github.com/Microsoft/vcpkg

The direction vcpkg is going, does not stack up with your assertion, in general. Check the issues and you'll see what I mean.

The direction is not the current state of affairs and you're suggesting changing the current recommendadions. I don't mind *adding* vcpkg as one possible way to install Boost. I just want there to be options for people who don't use MSVC or vcpkg. The most basic option is downloading sources and building Boost yourself. I think, it should be preserved.

On 08/28/18 15:50, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 14:44, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:

...

On 08/28/18 13:18, degski wrote:

...

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 13:14, Andrey Semashev via Boost mailto:boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

AFAIK, vcpkg is MSVC-specific. Not all Windows users use MSVC.

Did you fact-check that assertion?

Yes, Visual Studio is listed as a prerequisite here:

https://github.com/Microsoft/vcpkg

* Visual Studio 2017 or Visual Studio 2015 Update 3 (on Windows)

The "On Windows" applies to both listed versions of VS, no just 2015 ;-)

Yes, so? Does this contradict what I said?

On 08/28/18 16:27, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 15:12, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:

...

On 08/28/18 15:50, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

...

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 14:44, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:

...

On 08/28/18 13:18, degski wrote:

...

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 13:14, Andrey Semashev via Boost mailto:boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

AFAIK, vcpkg is MSVC-specific. Not all Windows users use MSVC.

Did you fact-check that assertion?

Yes, Visual Studio is listed as a prerequisite here:

https://github.com/Microsoft/vcpkg

* Visual Studio 2017 or Visual Studio 2015 Update 3 (on Windows)

The "On Windows" applies to both listed versions of VS, no just 2015 ;-)

Yes, so? Does this contradict what I said?

It invalidates "vcpkg is MSVC-specific", at least.

In what way? Unless the readme is wrong, MSVC is required on Windows.

On 08/28/18 16:38, degski via Boost wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 16:32, Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

...

... MSVC is required on Windows.

This is not what you asserted before.

I said it is MSVC-specific. Probably, I phrased it inaccurately and should have added "on Windows", but I didn't think platforms other than Windows were the main target anyway.

Point is, vcpkg is moving full speed to cmake only, which simply means it works on nix (and possibly osx) as well.

A project is in the making which will allow to use clang/llvm as a tool-chain (instead of MSVC) as well, but yes, it is in-flight. gcc is probably a bridge too far.

Yes, I understand that the direction is to make it more portable. We'll see how it goes. (Personally, I'm feeling skeptical, though.)

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:05 AM degski wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 16:51, Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

...

Yes, I understand that the direction is to make it more portable. We'll see how it goes. (Personally, I'm feeling skeptical, though.)

[...] But, yes, you are right, we **will** have to see. Also VS17 adds full support for cmake, and github (of course, as they [ms] spent 8 billion dollars on the thing). The 8 billion dollars gives a good idea as to what extent ms is committed to open source.

Maybe we can expect the equivalent of the commitment toward voice chat (Skype at 8 billion dollars), but only less than a third of the commitment toward corporate social networking (Linkedin at 26 billion dollars). Glen

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 15:44, Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

The direction is not the current state of affairs and you're suggesting changing the current recommendadions.

No, I'm not, I'm just observing what's going on, i.e. commits, issues etc., not what's in the readme. Things are moving rather fast, one could qualify it as 'break-neck-speed', certainly in the context of Boost. I did say this [support for other OS'es] does not apply to all packages, but the trend seems to be that that's where things are going. Nobody ever comments, ever, after somebody reports an issue "it does not build on Ubuntu", "Please try your luck elsewhere!" That's what I was referring to when I was saying, "see for yourself". I don't mind *adding* vcpkg as one possible way to install Boost. I just

want there to be options for people who don't use MSVC or vcpkg. The most basic option is downloading sources and building Boost yourself. I think, it should be preserved.

Nobody asked you to add anything to whatever. Yes, I'm aware of the fact not all people/corps use MSVC, painfully so. I thought, on the other hand that, on the other side of the divide, this was a non-issue. I'm planning on getting a taste for that myself, pending SSD delivery. I'll find out if I was wrong or not. degski -- *“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" - Herbert Stein* *“No, it isn’t truth. Truth isn’t truth" - Rudolph W. L. Giuliani*

On 08/28/18 16:24, Olaf van der Spek wrote:

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:

...

The most basic option is downloading sources and building Boost yourself.

Basic as in simplest?

Some people don't consider building Boost very simple. :) So I'll stay with "basic" in the sense it imposes the least requirements to the environment.

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 13:43, Mike Dev via Boost wrote:

... and I don't know, which compilers are supported on mac.

From what I gather, clang is old on mac, they just give it a higher release number, so it looks cool. They are on 9 or something like that (but it's 4 actually). Drink more apple-kool-aid and you will be ok (and please buy a apple watch as well)!

I think usage with mingw on windows requires some manual configuration,

but as it is cmake based, I would be surprised if it didn't work.

I think the idea is that all will go the cmake (as the only) way, but it is not all like that at the moment, not yet. Well, if there was an easy way to tell vcpkg, with which language

level to build boost with, I would agree, but it is definitively good enough and much better than the binary distribution.

This problem has been signaled and recognized as a problem and I'm confident in time (given the enthusiasm and relentless efforts of Robert S. and Alex K., possibly not very long from now) will be addressed. degski -- *“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" - Herbert Stein* *“No, it isn’t truth. Truth isn’t truth" - Rudolph W. L. Giuliani*