Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake thoughts

2009-06-08 Thread Robert Bielik
FYI, the "Use-file" approach in CMake land has been superceded by CMake package files: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_2.6_Notes#Packages If Boost were to provide BoostConfig.cmake and BoostConfigVersion.cmake files in its installation, then 'FindBoost.cmake' will be very simple. All problems w

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake thoughts

2009-06-08 Thread Michael Jackson
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 produced by the bu

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake thoughts

2009-06-08 Thread Brad King
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 produced by the build system then installed into the installation loca

Re: [Boost-cmake] CMake thoughts

2009-06-08 Thread Michael Jackson
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

[Boost-cmake] CMake thoughts

2009-06-08 Thread Robert Bielik
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 is designed just to create the boost libraries, which in my view in a non-sens