[trac] "Building Boost" vs. "build"
It looks like somebody went via Trac and moved some issues from the "Building Boost" component to "build" component. See, for example: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4147 I certainly appreciate help with triaging issues, but in general, such change seems wrong -- "Building Boost" is for issues affecting exactly that -- building boost, while the 'build' component contain issues that are not necessary affecting Boost C++ Libraries at all. Unfortunately, the changes are all anonymous, so it would be great if whoever made them speak up, and discuss the rationale. Thanks, -- Vladimir Prus CodeSourcery vladimir@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x722
----- Original Message ----- From: "Vladimir Prus" <vladimir@codesourcery.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 12:05 PM Subject: [boost] [trac] "Building Boost" vs. "build"
It looks like somebody went via Trac and moved some issues from the "Building Boost" component to "build" component. See, for example:
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4147
I certainly appreciate help with triaging issues, but in general, such change seems wrong -- "Building Boost" is for issues affecting exactly that -- building boost, while the 'build' component contain issues that are not necessary affecting Boost C++ Libraries at all.
Unfortunately, the changes are all anonymous, so it would be great if whoever made them speak up, and discuss the rationale.
Hi, Sorry if I was wrong while changing the library? I recognize I was wrong changing #4147. Let me know if I must revert the change for the other. #3625 python detection randomly broken new vladimir_prus Bugs build 104 minutes #3904 installing boost 1.42 does not update all include files in the destination directory new vladimir_prus Bugs build 106 minutes #4243 darwin.jam: -mmacosx-version-min not passed to compiler new vladimir_prus Bugs build 107 minutes #3993 target-os=linux should imply threadapi=posix new vladimir_prus Bugs build 2 hours BTW. I though that I was logged in. Best, Vicente
vicente.botet wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Vladimir Prus" <vladimir@codesourcery.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 12:05 PM Subject: [boost] [trac] "Building Boost" vs. "build"
It looks like somebody went via Trac and moved some issues from the "Building Boost" component to "build" component. See, for example:
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4147
I certainly appreciate help with triaging issues, but in general, such change seems wrong -- "Building Boost" is for issues affecting exactly that -- building boost, while the 'build' component contain issues that are not necessary affecting Boost C++ Libraries at all.
Unfortunately, the changes are all anonymous, so it would be great if whoever made them speak up, and discuss the rationale.
Hi,
Sorry if I was wrong while changing the library?
I recognize I was wrong changing #4147. Let me know if I must revert the change for the other. #3625 python detection randomly broken #3904 installing boost 1.42 does not update all include files in the destination directory #4243 darwin.jam: -mmacosx-version-min not passed to compiler #3993 target-os=linux should imply threadapi=posix
I think that #3904 appears to manifest on Boost itself, too. Also, #3993 objects to behaviour of Boost.Thread Jamfiles.
BTW. I though that I was logged in.
Did you login, or just enter your name when submitting a change? In the latter case, the name is forgotten and must be entered again when editing next issue. - Volodya
Does #2790 Executable bit is lost on windows builds <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2790> belongs to Boost Build or to build component? BTW, who is the maintainer of Boost Build? Best, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/-trac--%22Building-Boost%22-vs.-%22build%22-tp28803264... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 6/7/2010 9:20 AM, Vicente Botet Escriba wrote:
Does #2790 Executable bit is lost on windows builds <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2790> belongs to Boost Build or to build component?
BTW, who is the maintainer of Boost Build?
"Building Boost", no one. Boost Build, aka "build", Volodya (and myself) <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/15> -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
Rene Rivera-2 wrote:
On 6/7/2010 9:20 AM, Vicente Botet Escriba wrote:
Does #2790 Executable bit is lost on windows builds <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2790> belongs to Boost Build or to build component?
BTW, who is the maintainer of Boost Build?
"Building Boost", no one.
My bad. I miss this report. Vicente -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/-trac--%22Building-Boost%22-vs.-%22build%22-tp28803264... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
participants (4)
-
Rene Rivera -
Vicente Botet Escriba -
vicente.botet
-
Vladimir Prus