Re: [Boost-cmake] Dead project?

On 9/16/11 7:03 AM, in article 4e732d0e.9060...@pathscale.com, "C. Bergström" wrote: > > Did this project die last July or what? Anyone interested to keep it > going... ? Feel free to email me privately if you prefer not to post > blunt truth to the list.. > > Thanks I think some people are ke

Re: [Boost-cmake] Discussion of Boost-cmake moving forward

welcome. Specifically on what are good naming schemes for the various boost-cmake branches and such. All comments (good, bad, ugly) are welcomed and encouraged. Thanks for everyone's continued support. Mike Jackson 2010/8/26 Michael Jackson > I think we should only have the "cmake-*&qu

Re: [Boost-cmake] Discussion of Boost-cmake moving forward

2010/8/24 Michael Jackson > I think we should have a branch for each boost release where people can go to > get > boost with cmake and only have changes to the cmake files themselves > and not really the boost source files. Having a structure reflecting upstream Boost seems a goo

[Boost-cmake] Discussion of Boost-cmake moving forward

2010/8/24 Michael Jackson I think we should have a branch for each boost release where people can go to get boost with cmake and only have changes to the cmake files themselves and not really the boost source files. Having a structure reflecting upstream Boost seems a good thing, i.e

Re: [Boost-cmake] Boost-CMake with recent changes from upstream

On 8/17/10 2:32 PM, in article aanlktinxf25=fohags_chbxgvq=5x8jngp6z4429d...@mail.gmail.com, "Denis Arnaud" wrote: > 2010/8/17 Michael Jackson > > >> So I saw the announcement that Boost 1.44.0 had been released. I took a >> look >> around www.gitorious.com

Re: [Boost-cmake] Boost-CMake with recent changes from upstream

ease add some others as administrators to the gitorious/boost project so we can keep the distributions in a single place? Thanks. On 5/3/10 9:36 AM, in article c80449a5.ecfc%mike.jack...@bluequartz.net, "Michael Jackson" wrote: > On 4/28/10 10:48 AM, in article > 201004281

Re: [Boost-cmake] Boost-CMake with recent changes from upstream

On 4/28/10 10:48 AM, in article 201004281048.07303.marcus.hanw...@kitware.com, "Marcus D. Hanwell" wrote: > On Wednesday 28 April 2010 06:07:56 Isidor Zeuner wrote: >>> Seconded. If I find fixes, I will try to send patches. >> >> Great! Patches and other feedback are always welcome. >> > I am al

Re: [Boost-cmake] Building boost "with an uninstalled build" and linking to boost libs

is seems to be a chicken-and-egg thing. Not sure what to do except ask on the CMake Users Mailing list. sorry ___ Mike Jackson www.bluequartz.net Principal Software Engineer mike.jack...@bluequartz.net BlueQuartz Software

Re: [Boost-cmake] Building boost "with an uninstalled build" and linking to boost libs

The Boost-CMake (IMHO) sort of "abused" the cmake system somewhat in order to make it more "bjam" like. In practice if the first pass of FindBoost.cmake does not find anything then I usually have to manually go into the CMakeCache.txt file and remove all the boost variables and re-run CMake

Re: [Boost-cmake] Building boost "with an uninstalled build" and linking to boost libs

Welcome to Boost world. I don't think the Boost-CMake guys have tackled the use-case that you are using so I hate to say it, BUT you may be "ahead of the curve" on this one. All I can tell you is what setup works for me. Theoretically you can do what you are trying to do. Practically there

Re: [Boost-cmake] Building boost "with an uninstalled build" and linking to boost libs

There are going to be some "growing pains" with Boost-cmake as some new infrastructure is introduced to the Boost build system. I still remain "old" school. I build* boost and install it somewhere. I then use the following in my CMakeLists.txt file. SET (Boost_FIND_REQUIRED TRUE) SET (Boos

Re: [Boost-cmake] A couple of build report/fixes

John, You are probably on the "bleeding" edge with boost on a Cray. I am sure patches are welcome. ___ Mike Jackson www.bluequartz.net On Feb 4, 2010, at 4:09 AM, Biddiscombe, John A. wrote: I tried to build boost

Re: [Boost-cmake] building boost in subdirectory

1) Are you talking about creating a "Subset" of the boost distribution that only includes the elements (headers/libraries) that you are interested in? 2) Or are you talking about building boost as part of your project via a call to add_subdirectory()? For (1) I have hacked up bcp to basically do

Re: [Boost-cmake] Another small issue with Boost.CMake and FindBoost.cmake

, Ohio On Dec 16, 2009, at 5:44 PM, Troy D. Straszheim wrote: Michael Jackson writes: So I say go for it until someone has a problem with it. Roger. Will this be in with the changes you want me to pull? -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake

Re: [Boost-cmake] Another small issue with Boost.CMake and FindBoost.cmake

ke Jackson On Dec 16, 2009, at 5:34 PM, Troy D. Straszheim wrote: Michael Jackson writes: In the FindBoost.cmake file there is a line like: # Setting some more suffixes for the library SET (Boost_LIB_PREFIX "") if ( WIN32 AND Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS ) SET (Boost_LIB_PREFIX &q

Re: [Boost-cmake] Another small issue with Boost.CMake and FindBoost.cmake

On 12/16/09 2:11 PM, in article 87fx7a3fa0@resophonic.com, "Troy D. Straszheim" wrote: > Michael Jackson writes: > >> On 12/16/09 1:41 PM, in article >> 2a66cbe0-57c7-45d4-8d44-cddc6b935...@bluequartz.net, >> "Michael Jackson" >> wrote:

Re: [Boost-cmake] Another small issue with Boost.CMake and FindBoost.cmake

On 12/16/09 1:41 PM, in article 2a66cbe0-57c7-45d4-8d44-cddc6b935...@bluequartz.net, "Michael Jackson" wrote: > Trying things out on windows and I noticed that when I build static > libraries that the names of the libraries are NOT prefixed with "lib" > like in the bj

[Boost-cmake] Another small issue with Boost.CMake and FindBoost.cmake

Trying things out on windows and I noticed that when I build static libraries that the names of the libraries are NOT prefixed with "lib" like in the bjam version of the build. This causes the FindBoost included with CMake 2.6.4 and 2.8.0 to NOT find an installed boost on Windows using Visu

Re: [Boost-cmake] Using BCP to create a "Subset" of Boost ... And CMake ... And Windows

Boost subset is 17.5 MB. _ Mike Jackson mike.jack...@bluequartz.net BlueQuartz Softwarewww.bluequartz.net Principal Software Engineer Dayton, Ohio On Dec 10, 2009, at 4:14 PM, Michael Jackson

Re: [Boost-cmake] How to have Boost.MPI use OpenMPI (rather than MPICH2)

On 12/16/09 12:48 PM, in article 8be61fe00912160948n3f016945k1d361be06dc5d...@mail.gmail.com, "Denis Arnaud" wrote: > 2009/12/15 troy > >> >> alt.boost.cmake uses cmake's standard detection of MPI... our docs are >> very terse: >> >> http://sodium.resophonic.com/boost-cmake/current-docs/extern

[Boost-cmake] Boost Tools are NOT being built

I was trying to get the Boost-cmake to build bcp for me and generally no matter what I put in for BUILD_TOOLS none of the tools are built. Seems I have traced the problem to this line in tools/CMakeLists.txt foreach(tooldir ${tooldirs} ) message(STATUS "tooldir:

Re: [Boost-cmake] Using BCP to create a "Subset" of Boost ... And CMake ... And Windows

On Dec 10, 2009, at 4:11 PM, James C. Sutherland wrote: On Dec 10, 2009, at 12:02 PM, Michael Jackson wrote: So I hacked on bcp a bit to add in the detection of CMake files so when doing something like: [mjackson] $ bcp boost/program_options.hpp boost/smart_ptr.hpp boost

[Boost-cmake] Using BCP to create a "Subset" of Boost ... And CMake ... And Windows

So I hacked on bcp a bit to add in the detection of CMake files so when doing something like: [mjackson] $ bcp boost/program_options.hpp boost/smart_ptr.hpp boost/ pointer_cast.hpp boost/algorithm/string.hpp boost/thread.hpp tools/ build/cmake /tmp/Boost-1.41.0 All the necessary CMake file

Re: [Boost-cmake] Cmake Variable Naming

On 12/7/09 1:39 PM, in article f606717b-4484-4a7a-b16f-cb6217231...@utah.edu, "James C. Sutherland" wrote: > On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:34 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: > >> Just a comment on some of the variable naming within the Cmake files. There >> are already some folk

[Boost-cmake] Cmake Variable Naming

Just a comment on some of the variable naming within the Cmake files. There are already some folks embedding the entire boost-cmake distribution into their own projects, then using "add_subdirectory()" to try and build just the parts that they need. Since Cmake does not really have a namespace I th

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost 1.41.0-cmake0 and CMake 2.6.4 - The usual, CMake can not find boost.

_ Mike Jackson mike.jack...@bluequartz.net BlueQuartz Softwarewww.bluequartz.net Principal Software Engineer Dayton, Ohio On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:29 PM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: Thanks Troy. The probl

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost 1.41.0-cmake0 and CMake 2.6.4 - The usual, CMake can not find boost.

And to add insult to injury, I just tried using bjam instead and I get an error so that bjam will not even build. And the hits just keep on coming.. -- Mike Jackson On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:29 PM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: Thanks Troy. The problem is that those of

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost 1.41.0-cmake0 and CMake 2.6.4 - The usual, CMake can not find boost.

n (OFF by default) put in. _ Mike Jackson mike.jack...@bluequartz.net BlueQuartz Softwarewww.bluequartz.net Principal Software Engineer Dayton, Ohio On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:29 PM, troy d. straszheim

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost 1.41.0-cmake0 and CMake 2.6.4 - The usual, CMake can not find boost.

Thanks Troy. The problem is that those of us running previous versions of CMake will have a real problem with this setup. I realize I'm just the "squeaky wheel" here but maybe I should have helped out more to put in an option to use the "bjam" installation style so that some backward com

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost 1.41.0-cmake0 and CMake 2.6.4 - The usual, CMake can not find boost.

Principal Software Engineer Dayton, Ohio On Dec 4, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Michael Jackson wrote: Pulled the latest boost 1.41.0cmake0, compiled and installed. Then I tried to have my CMake based project find Boost. As usual, this failed. Using CMake 2.6.4 currently. Started debugging

[Boost-cmake] boost 1.41.0-cmake0 and CMake 2.6.4 - The usual, CMake can not find boost.

Pulled the latest boost 1.41.0cmake0, compiled and installed. Then I tried to have my CMake based project find Boost. As usual, this failed. Using CMake 2.6.4 currently. Started debugging into the FindBoost.cmake file and here is what I am finding out: _boost_INCLUDE_SEARCH_DIRS = /Users/S

Re: [Boost-cmake] Generation of the PDF file

Cool, Thanks. -- Mike Jackson On Dec 4, 2009, at 12:09 PM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: How is the PDF file <http://sodium.resophonic.com/boost-cmake/1.41.0.cmake0/boost-1.41.0.cmake0.pdf > generated? I am working with the HDF Group to move their build system to

[Boost-cmake] Generation of the PDF file

How is the PDF file generated? I am working with the HDF Group to move their build system to CMake and they were wanting something just like this. With the proper citations and acknowledgements, can I re-use the

Re: [Boost-cmake] Linking Debug Builds

Is your project using CMake? I think in the FindBoost.cmake there is a fall back to use the Release libraries. But it has been a while since I investigated that. Mike On Nov 24, 2009, at 11:45 AM, James C. Sutherland wrote: I am on Mac and Linux. On Nov 24, 2009, at 8:21 AM, Michael

Re: [Boost-cmake] Linking Debug Builds

Are you on windows or a Unix variant? (Linux, OS X.. ). If you are on windows then you _really_ do NOT want to link to a library built with different crt libraries using Visual Studio. This is a recipe for disaster. If you are on MinGW/MSYS/Cygwin then I have no Idea what the "correct" solu

[Boost-cmake] RFC: exported targets

So the problem I see with this is that I still need to know "a priori" what boost libraries are available on the system so exporting the targets really doesn't help much, at least not me. In your example (quoted below) what happens if I don't have the shared- debug of boost-thread but instead

Re: [Boost-cmake] Configuration for sonames for the boost dynamic libraries on Unix

This is THE SINGLE IMPROVEMENT someone could make for those of us using CMake and are dependent on the boost libraries. Finding Boost with CMake is historically a pain and is extremely error prone. There is no support for future versions in the current FindBoost. You can take a guess, but t

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake thoughts

On Jun 8, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Brad King wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: What _really_ needs to be done, for BOTH the bjam and the cmake based builds is to produce a "UseBoost.cmake" file akin to the UseQt4, UseVTK, UseITK, UseParaView that are either included with CMake or produ

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake thoughts

Thoughts are inline.. On Jun 2, 2009, at 3:40 AM, Robert Bielik wrote: Hi, The preliminary CMake file in the distr. (1.38.0) is IMHO way, WAY too complex. It makes no sense to have each sublib as a separate project, and in all different flavors at that (debug/rel/mt/st). It seems as it

Re: [Boost-cmake] Path to test binaries for Boost.MPI (and Boost.graph_parallel) seems to be incorrect

On May 20, 2009, at 3:17 PM, Nick Edmonds wrote: Hi All, I've been hacking the CMake build system to build the tests/examples for libs/graph_parallel and in doing so found that the path to the tests seems to be incorrect. I borrowed large portions of CMakeLists.txt from Boost.MPI, which

Re: [Boost-cmake] ctest system information on mac

On May 19, 2009, at 11:29 AM, Julien Jomier wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: Ok. Some hacking around and this is the output that I am getting on my Xeon Workstation now. And also there is still some discussion on what exactly is meant by "Is64Bits". Julien, can you comment on th

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

On May 19, 2009, at 7:27 AM, David Cole wrote: On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Brad King wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: thanks for the heads up about vxl. I took those 2 scripts and adapted them for boost. I have since been able to submit an experimental Dashboard to <h

Re: [Boost-cmake] ctest system information on mac

On May 19, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Julien Jomier wrote: Bill Hoffman wrote: Bill, I am tearing apart the ParseSysCtl() method at the moment. CMake does not have to Fork a process to get the sysctl values, you can call them directly using sysctlbyname(..) method. I am currently doing this for a

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

www.bluequartz.net On May 19, 2009, at 7:27 AM, David Cole wrote: On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Brad King wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: thanks for the heads up about vxl. I took those 2 scripts and adapted them for boost. I have since been able to submit an experimental Dashboard to <h

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

_ Mike Jackson mike.jack...@bluequartz.net BlueQuartz Softwarewww.bluequartz.net Principal Software Engineer Dayton, Ohio On May 18, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Brad King wrote: troy d. stras

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

On May 18, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Brad King wrote: troy d. straszheim wrote: Question #1: How do the settings in the script you posted relate to the settings found in $CMAKE_SOURCE_DIR/CTestConfig.cmake? Can they be combined? The settings in the source tree are project-wide and have CDash

Re: [Boost-cmake] Build failures on Mac OS X 10.5

Principal Software Engineer Dayton, Ohio On Mar 3, 2009, at 6:12 PM, E. Wing wrote: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Michael Jackson > wrote: Well, basically I am confused. Is ICU bundled with Boost? It has been a Long time since I dug into the boost sources. And,

Re: [Boost-cmake] Build failures on Mac OS X 10.5

inary". --- Mike Jackson www.bluequartz.net On Mar 3, 2009, at 10:37 AM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: What build system is ICU using? You may have to add the -arch ppc - arch i386 flags yourself on the command line using something like CXXFLAGS="

Re: [Boost-cmake] Build failures on Mac OS X 10.5

What build system is ICU using? You may have to add the -arch ppc - arch i386 flags yourself on the command line using something like CXXFLAGS="-arch ppc -arch i386" You can use bjam to get a universal build of Boost. _ Mike Jackson

Re: [Boost-cmake] Parallel Builds on Windows (Was: Analysis of the current CMake system)

There are those in the CMake community that successfully combine "unix makefiles" with the Visual Studio Compilers to perform parallel builds. http://www.cmake.org/pipermail/cmake/2008-June/022178.html is one of the relevant threads. Here is another thread that has some important informati

Re: [Boost-cmake] Boost CMake status?

On Dec 3, 2008, at 9:09 AM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Hey Joaquin, JOAQUIN M. LOPEZ MUÑOZ wrote: Hi, I've discovered that the libs at the trunk are populated by files by the name CMakeLists.txt and module.cmake and I assume these belong to the once annonced effort to create a build infrastruc

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Nov 7, 2008, at 3:53 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Any ideas on what we would like to keep "un-modularized" for now? Looking at the dependency graph here are my own thoughts on which libraries should pr

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

On Nov 30, 2008, at 10:56 AM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: Is Python installed by default on Windows?advocate> There is already plenty of python there. Have you noticed it? I think it is a little late to have this debate. Python is the right tool for the job.

Re: [Boost-cmake] Regression Test Reporting (Was: Variant Builds and missing libraries)

On Nov 28, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Beman Dawes wrote: On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 4:49 PM, David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (Which answered another question that I was going to ask). > > Currently the CMake system will NOT do any of this. If this is the > behavior that is wanted then the

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

On Nov 29, 2008, at 2:59 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote: David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Nov 26 2008, Michael Jackson bluequartz.net> wrote: Taking a deeper look into this issue (by experimenting with bjam) this is what I am seeing (at least on OS X). bjam errors on the side of building i

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

On Nov 29, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Eric Niebler wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: External build scripts and such could be a reasonable choice. The only thing I don't like about external scripts is that they are generally NOT cross-platform and you end up writing a script for windows and on

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

On Nov 28, 2008, at 4:49 PM, David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Nov 26 2008, Michael Jackson wrote: Taking a deeper look into this issue (by experimenting with bjam) this is what I am seeing (at least on OS X). bjam errors on the side of building if I don't quite give it the

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

On Nov 26, 2008, at 9:32 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:31 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: On Nov 12, 2008, at 11:39 AM, David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Nov 12 2008, Michael Jackson bluequartz.net> wrote: Came across

Re: [Boost-cmake] Spirit Regression Test Not Compiling

On Nov 26, 2008, at 10:46 AM, Hartmut Kaiser wrote: What is the proper etiquette to report a regression test that will not compile. BJam will just skip past the failure whereas CMake will not. I can comment out the compilation of the test for now to get past it I guess.. Which one is failin

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:31 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: On Nov 12, 2008, at 11:39 AM, David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Nov 12 2008, Michael Jackson wrote: Came across an interesting situation while doing some testing on the CMake build system. I configured my build

Re: [Boost-cmake] Spirit Regression Test Not Compiling

On Nov 25, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Hartmut Kaiser wrote: What is the proper etiquette to report a regression test that will not compile. BJam will just skip past the failure whereas CMake will not. I can comment out the compilation of the test for now to get past it I guess.. Which one is fai

[Boost-cmake] Spirit Regression Test Not Compiling

What is the proper etiquette to report a regression test that will not compile. BJam will just skip past the failure whereas CMake will not. I can comment out the compilation of the test for now to get past it I guess.. Thanks _ Mike J

Re: [Boost-cmake] [CMake] Visual Studio Warning Level

On Nov 22, 2008, at 8:01 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote: Bill Hoffman wrote: Robert Dailey wrote: Hi, I've done some googling on how to set warning levels for visual studio projects generated with CMake and I can't say I really enjoy the proposed solutions I've found. Literally this should be a

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

On Nov 12, 2008, at 11:39 AM, David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Nov 12 2008, Michael Jackson wrote: Came across an interesting situation while doing some testing on the CMake build system. I configured my build tree to be SHARED+MULTI- THREADED+DEBUG. When I built I was almost immediately

[Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

Came across an interesting situation while doing some testing on the CMake build system. I configured my build tree to be SHARED+MULTI- THREADED+DEBUG. When I built I was almost immediately getting an error about not being able to link against boost_test_exec_monitor-mt- shared. Which is wron

[Boost-cmake] Force build of the boost_test_exec_monitor

Started branching out my testing of the CMake build system and one of the combinations that I tried was Debug-Shared-MultiThreaded. Well the first thing I hit was some of the tests not compiling. Turns out it was because the boost_test_exec_monitor was NOT being compiled since it is STATIC

Re: [Boost-cmake] build of boost trunk

Fixed.. Mike Jackson On Nov 11, 2008, at 8:45 AM, Alex Ott wrote: Hello "MJ" == Michael Jackson writes: MJ> Give it a try now after updating from trunk. MJ> On Nov 11, 2008, at 2:50 AM, Alex Ott wrote: One more error. It happen only on first run of cmake in clean direct

Re: [Boost-cmake] build of boost trunk

Give it a try now after updating from trunk. On Nov 11, 2008, at 2:50 AM, Alex Ott wrote: Re all I updated my repository from svn and got following message, when i try to rebuild: CMake Error at libs/preprocessor/test/CMakeLists.txt:1 (boost_additional_test_dependencies): Unknown CMak

Re: [Boost-cmake] build of boost trunk

I will take a look at it later this morning. What system (Hardware/Software/CMake version) are you running. On Nov 11, 2008, at 2:50 AM, Alex Ott wrote: Re all I updated my repository from svn and got following message, when i try to rebuild: CMake Error at libs/preprocessor/test/CMakeLi

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Nov 9, 2008, at 12:46 PM, Eric Niebler wrote: (Resending from the correct account ... sorry if you get this more than once.) Michael Jackson wrote: The latest dependency graph can be found at: http://www.bluequartz.net/dependencies.pdf I've just removed the dependency of spir

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Nov 10, 2008, at 11:47 AM, David Abrahams wrote: on Fri Nov 07 2008, "Doug Gregor" wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Any ideas on what we would like to keep "un-modularized" for now? Looking at the depend

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 31, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: What I am not sure of is what to do with the remaining headers in the "boost" directory. Are those going to be the "core" of Boost or ? Yeah, that's how I would do it. So are talking about modularizing what is left into "libs/core" then?

Re: [Boost-cmake] Progress Report

On Nov 5, 2008, at 7:56 PM, Michael Jackson wrote: On Nov 4, 2008, at 2:21 PM, Michael Jackson wrote: On Nov 4, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Beman Dawes wrote: On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have been working hard on updating the CMake build sys

Re: [Boost-cmake] Current Dependency Graph

On Nov 3, 2008, at 9:25 AM, David Abrahams wrote: on Fri Oct 31 2008, Michael Jackson wrote: Well I think the downside to the current dependency graph generation is that it is dependent on "me" including the proper depends in the "module.cmake" file. I was looking a

Re: [Boost-cmake] Progress Report

On Nov 4, 2008, at 2:21 PM, Michael Jackson wrote: On Nov 4, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Beman Dawes wrote: On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have been working hard on updating the CMake build system to match the Boost trunk repository. As it st

Re: [Boost-cmake] Progress Report

On Nov 4, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Beman Dawes wrote: On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have been working hard on updating the CMake build system to match the Boost trunk repository. As it stands I have been able to compile all the libraries in

[Boost-cmake] Progress Report

I have been working hard on updating the CMake build system to match the Boost trunk repository. As it stands I have been able to compile all the libraries in static and dynamic multi-threaded debug modes. I can get about 50% of the regression test to compile. Just FYI.

[Boost-cmake] Modularization, Core and Circular Dependencies

On Oct 31, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:14 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What I am not sure of i

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 31, 2008, at 8:55 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: macro(boost_test_add_dependent_includes includes) foreach (include ${includes}) #message(STATUS "include: ${include}") include_directories("${B

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 31, 2008, at 6:03 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 31, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 31, 2008, at 2:16 PM,

Re: [Boost-cmake] Want to help but need to prioritize TODO list

On Oct 31, 2008, at 5:58 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So should I be committing what I have to the trunk. Yes, please. I can put some cmake code in the top level CMakeLists.txt file that will abort the cmake run

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 31, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 31, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: What I am not sure of is what to do with the remaining headers in the "boost" directory. Are those

Re: [Boost-cmake] Want to help but need to prioritize TODO list

On Oct 31, 2008, at 11:32 AM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That argues for merging into the trunk sooner rather than later. OTOH, if there isn't any new build system documentation and/or the new build system is unstable, then me

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 31, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: What I am not sure of is what to do with the remaining headers in the "boost" directory. Are those going to be the "core" of Boost or ? Yeah, that's how I would do it. So are talking about modularizing what is left into "libs/core" then?

Re: [Boost-cmake] Current Dependency Graph

On Oct 31, 2008, at 1:21 PM, David Abrahams wrote: on Fri Oct 31 2008, Mike Jackson wrote: Wiki Might be a better place for this, Definitely. but I'll get it out this way for now. Doesn't look quite right; IIUC there are circular dependencies between mpl and type_traits. -- Dave A

Re: [Boost-cmake] Testing Setup

On Oct 31, 2008, at 1:30 PM, Beman Dawes wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Mike Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: I am working through the "testing" part of the build system at this point and I have some questions about how the typical boost developer actually runs the "tests".

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:14 PM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 30, 2008, at 2:17 PM, David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Oct 29 2008, "Doug Gregor" wrote: I added some debugging into the BoostCore.cmake modul

Re: [Boost-cmake] Want to help but need to prioritize TODO list

On Oct 31, 2008, at 11:32 AM, Doug Gregor wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That argues for merging into the trunk sooner rather than later. OTOH, if there isn't any new build system documentation and/or the new build system is unstable, then me

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 30, 2008, at 2:17 PM, David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Oct 29 2008, "Doug Gregor" wrote: I added some debugging into the BoostCore.cmake modularization code so that I can try and figure out what has been and has NOT been modularized. What I am coming up with is 27 libraries have been

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

Doug Gregor wrote: On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Michael Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Just an update on what I have been messing around with today (really just want to be sure I am understanding what _really_ needs to be done). I merged the "branches/cmake/release" int

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

On Oct 27, 2008, at 5:04 PM, David Abrahams wrote: on Mon Oct 27 2008, Mike Jackson wrote: Doug Is there any more work to be done on this front? I am looking for a project to work in the immediate future and I think my own CMake experience may help to finish this up if needed. Also wha

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake modularization update

Here is my current thoughts on those: SVN Merge of CMake support into the Boost trunk - If we are just talking about merging in the CMakeList.txt and .cmake files then that shouldn't take more than a half day assuming a few things. I can merge locally then commit all the CMake files to th