Is someone already working on a port that supports Boost 1.35.0?

[Jeremy Messenger]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:27:42 -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman  
<aryeh.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Simon Barner wrote:
> |> | Yes, I am working on a port. I will send a message to freebsd-ports
> |> | once it is ready for testing.
> |>
> |> While your at it please make it so there is one boost port not boost  
> and
> |> boost-python
> |
> | I will keep boost and boost-python in seperate ports in order to
> | keep boost as lean as possible. boost-python will no longer conflict
> | with boost but just add python support. The same applies for OpenMPI
> | and MPICH support.
> |
> | Simon
> |
> Have you ever examined the ports that actually use boost and  
> boost-pyhton... it seems completely random sometimes which one is which  
> (i.e. stuff that doesn't require pyhton often depends on boost-python  
> and stuff that does depend on it relies on boost).... this leads to some  
> really nasty conflicts and hard to resolve (unless you have done it  
> before) ordering problems (if I build port A then B then B will fail  
> because it wanted one flavor of boost when the other one is the  
> installed one but if you do B then A then it works fine because A  
> doesn't care what flavor of boost it is looking for).... the classic  
> example of this is net-p2p/deluge and multimedia/miro where deluge wants  
> python and miro doesn't care.... Since it is trivial to have a

Opposite, Miro wants python and Deluge doesn't need it. But I think in  
next major version of Deluge 0.6 might want boost-python (uncheck).

> build/ruin depend on an OPTION (and you already do it via a gnob no more  
> complexity it added by doing it as an OPTION)... Almost every time I  
> have brought boost problems up the overwelming consenus among  
> maintainers that relie on boost is two seperate ports is completely  
> insane.

You should read his comments again. He said, 'boost-python will no longer  
conflict with boost but just add python support.' It's what I have  
requested sometime ago and exactly what we need. Thanks for your work,  
barner, and look forward for it! I have been a bit busy lately, but I will  
try to find time to test it when you have patch available.

BTW: Seperate ports aren't insane if done in right way....and very nice to  
have.

Cheers,
Mezz

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkgX2R4ACgkQk8GFzCrQm4AGEgCbBtFhlrP/TvWB6BLczKWpxA2k
> UzkAnill/mMrh2CgeNVfeRuFuKJ6sv3n
> =TCL6
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
mezz7 at cox.net  -  mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/  -  gnome at FreeBSD.org