From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-26 09:21:29
"David Bergman" <davidb_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> Yes, we do [need to flirt with the masses...]. We need maximal adoption
> in order to be best
>> positioned for standardization. Not just to get the
>> libraries accepted, but also so they are really deserving of
>> standardization.
>
> Ok, so what can I do to assist in this effort? More concretely, what
> kind of installer are we talking about?
Well, to begin with I think we need a Windows installer for headers
and vc7.1 binaries. There are some free pro-quality installer
construction systems for Windows out there; I forget the names though.
There are a number of valuable possible enhancements I can think of,
if you're ambitious:
- Allow users to select which libraries they want and:
a. use bcp to allow users to cut down how much is actually
installed, or
b. allow people to cut down how much is actually downloaded (a
la cygwin installer)
- Add support for binaries for other compilers, although especially
when you add STLPort in as a variable there are just too many
libs to build to get complete coverage, so:
- add support for invoking bjam via a GUI. Preferably this GUI
would dynamically show the user the bjam command-line it is
composing so that the user would gain some familiarity and be
able to step outside the bounds of the GUI eventually.
> I would like for us to have an installer-generator (for Windows) so
> we do not have to recreate, or at least rebuild, the installer for
> every revision of Boost.
Sounds good. Thanks for volunteering!
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com