From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 2 22:44:24 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B66F1065670; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 22:44:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from smtp.timeweb.ru (smtp.timeweb.ru [217.170.79.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D63938FC1D; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 22:44:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from [213.148.20.85] (helo=hive.panopticon) by smtp.timeweb.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LpVe1-0002Bz-0s; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 02:44:21 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.32]) by hive.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC55954D; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 02:44:25 +0400 (MSD) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BF3B910883C; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 02:44:13 +0400 (MSD) Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 02:44:13 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Alexander Churanov Message-ID: <20090402224413.GV1964@hades.panopticon> References: <3cb459ed0903270809s2da0fce7i66686a176d369931@mail.gmail.com> <20090331230246.GN1964@hades.panopticon> <20090401113857.GO1964@hades.panopticon> <3cb459ed0904020821u3051c572l6461274ae7ff118b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3cb459ed0904020821u3051c572l6461274ae7ff118b@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Jeremy Messenger , lwhsu@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of devel/boost upgrade X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 22:44:24 -0000 * Alexander Churanov (alexanderchuranov@gmail.com) wrote: > I've already did it about a month ago. Currently I'm testing the > solution. There are two ideas about splitting boost: Woo, this is great! > 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. Not sure if splitting it into many small libraries is a good idea. How many are there, btw? Is it a port per libboost_*so, or per include/boost/* ? Also splitting shared libs and source libs is a strange idea - there will be confusion on which port does specific library belong and it seems very likely that most boost-using ports will depend on both ports. Boost-python is a must to be split into separate port because it has an extra dependency, docs too, because not many people need them, bjam, well, because it's a build tool, and everything else may be left in a single port. -- Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D amdmi3@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru http://www.amdmi3.ru