[Boost-cmake] boost-cmake building bjam?

whether or not the library was present or not based on its existence. -sc PS After revisiting bjam to get boost-log working, my feelings towards bjam are much more closely aligned with the statement "writhing hatred." -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittenden.org ___

Re: [Boost-cmake] Release 1.41.0.cmake0

t results from that for a few hrs. -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittenden.org ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-cmake

Re: [Boost-cmake] disabling particular external dependencies

st_foo::test_method() in foo_unittests.cc.o I can populate the list of libs that I need by hand, but am looking for guidance on what's the right way forward. Is there a correct way to use find_package(Boost...) with an installed 1.41.0 atm? I notice Boost_VERSION is

Re: [Boost-cmake] disabling particular external dependencies

lt to ON, same concept for linker flags include("${CONTRIBOBJ}/lib/Boost.cmake") find_package(Boost ${Boost_VERSION} COMPONENTS thread NO_MODULE) # no need for include(${Boost_INCLUDE_DIR}) with Boost_SET_INCLUDE=ON Food for thought. -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...

Re: [Boost-cmake] 1.40.0.cmake5 (?) builds cleanly

related code in boost? I know it's a part of Boost, but I just don't care about python 99% of the time 'cause well... I'm programming in C++ :~] -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittenden.org ___ Boost-cmake mailing li

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS on Darwin...

1.40 now and let you know. git or tarball? URL? -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittenden.org ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-cmake

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS on Darwin...

f what cmake has to offer. Slowly but surely I'm pushing various variables out of autogen.sh in to cmake files. On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Sean Chittenden wrote: I've been running with the following snippet in my boost build directory for a while. IF(CMAKE_COMPILER_IS_GNU

[Boost-cmake] CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS on Darwin...

cmake2, it looks like CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS is being reset somewhere along the lines. Is there a correct/better way to pass this in to CMake or is there a way to have Boost cmake automatically set - gdwarf-2 using the above logic? tia. -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittenden.org ___

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

Right now there's no version info on the .so's. Going forward with .so version info that's unique, it won't. :) -sc -- Sean Chittenden On Oct 29, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote: Sean Chittenden wrote: /usr local lib boost-1.40.0 boost-1.41.0

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

even comes with ASCII art!): http://www.snow.nl/dist/htmlc/ch14s05.html#id2838038 I'm still coming up to speed on boost's convention for micro versions, but couldn't the SONAME be set to "*.so.1.41" instead of "*.1.41.0" ? -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittend

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

asant is a symlink from lib/libboost_foo.so to lib/boost-1.40.0/ libboost_foo.so. That's the only scenario that should be prevented at all costs, the one above is a preference from having hunted down FreeBSD ports bugs in the past. -sc -- Sean Ch

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

uires: Libs: -L${libdir} -lfreetype -lz -Wl,-framework,CoreServices,- framework,ApplicationServices Cflags: -I${includedir}/freetype2 -I${includedir} and dump it in a directory. All of those bits of info should be available from cmake. If a user has pkg-config, they win. If not, no

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

oing back to having a gazillion foo-config binaries. I get the value of pkg-config, not arguing against it, just pointing out that we have the necessary tools in place with cmake and that cmake is well suited for solving this problem without adding additional dependencies. :) --

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

ion comments? Avoid pkg-config, it's very Linux and drags in a ton of dependencies (most of the time, never required, but that's the way it goes with everyone's packaging system of choice). A cmake variable would be preferred, imo (similar to the cmake boost version

Re: [Boost-cmake] 1.40.0.cmake4

1.40-cmake4 looks good on my end. What's the scoop with 1.41? Would love to start playing with tree_properties. :) -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittenden.org ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.o

Re: [Boost-cmake] 1.41.0.cmakebeta3

What's the tarball's layout going to look like? Cmakebeta3 has a radically different structure to it compared to earlier releases. -sc -- Sean Chittenden On Oct 27, 2009, at 12:28 PM, "troy d. straszheim" wrote: Daniel James wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:03 PM

Re: [Boost-cmake] [PATCH] Use LIB_SUFFIX, allows installing 64bit libs into /usr/lib64.

Boost follow? As a retired ports committer for FreeBSD, and having looked at various other packaging systems, using autoconf's environment variables would dramatically simplify various porting efforts for boost packages in the future. $0.02 -sc -- Sean Chitt

Re: [Boost-cmake] [PATCH] Use LIB_SUFFIX, allows installing 64bit libs into /usr/lib64.

o to be packager-friendly. That's a large part of the reason this boost-cmake effort exists. -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/bo

[Boost-cmake] cmake regression for 1.40 vs. 1.39...

ack to bjam? Thanks in advance. -sc -- Sean Chittenden s...@chittenden.org ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-cmake