Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 19:21:00 +0400 From: Alexander Churanov <alexanderchuranov@gmail.com> To: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net>, lwhsu@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of devel/boost upgrade Message-ID: <3cb459ed0904020821u3051c572l6461274ae7ff118b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20090401113857.GO1964@hades.panopticon> References: <3cb459ed0903270809s2da0fce7i66686a176d369931@mail.gmail.com> <20090331230246.GN1964@hades.panopticon> <op.urotvvn79aq2h7@localhost> <20090401113857.GO1964@hades.panopticon>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2009/4/1 Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>: > * Jeremy Messenger (mezz7@cox.net) wrote: > >> No need bsd.boost.mk over that small stuff. How about resolve conflict for >> real by split boost and boost-python by have boost only install non-python >> stuff and boost-python install only python stuff? > > That of course would be harder and more interesting, maybe I gotta dig > into it. Hi folks! I've already did it about a month ago. Currently I'm testing the solution. There are two ideas about splitting boost: 1) Split it into bjam, source-libs, shared-libs, python-libs and docs. This is what was actually done by me. 2) Split it into bjam, docs and a separate port for each library. This needs discussion. If you are interested, you may download sample ports from http://alexanderchuranov.com/boost-port/ The most recent tarball contains a set of alternative non-conflicting versioned ports for boost. They may be installed in addition to existing devel/boost. The 'source-libs' are header-only libraries that do not need compilation. For now I've found a single flaw in the latest set of these ports: devel/boost-python-libs-1.38 conflicts with devel/boost, because they install Pyste in the same place. Please, note that the flaw is only about the conflict of versioned port and non-versioned, if we would break non-versioned, system-layout boost as we currently have into parts, then there is no flaw at all. I didn't started a mailing thread on this topic, because there are tasks related to devel/boost that are not yet completed: updating to 1.37 and then to 1.38. Splitting boost into parts have following benefits: 1) Shorter time of installation/updates from packages. 2) Fine-grained selection of what's really necessary. 3) Simplified dependency tracking for other ports that depend on boost. 4) No more issues like conflict of devel/boost and devel/boost-python There are also drawbacks: 1) Time to build complete boost from ports is increased, because boost.org provides a single source package and it gets decompressed several times. 2) The number of ports is increased. The questions are: 1) Should we break boost into parts? 2) Should we break boost into "jam', 'source-libs', 'shared-libs', 'python-libs' and 'docs' or into one port per library? If folks agree on splitting boost into parts, I'll be glad to finish it. Sincerely, Alexander Churanov, maintainer of devel/boost
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3cb459ed0904020821u3051c572l6461274ae7ff118b>