Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Pull request announcement
From: Roger Leigh (rleigh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-09-14 15:40:20
On 14/09/18 15:05, Alexander Grund via Boost wrote:
> The major problem I see are the variants.
>
> - b2 can build multiple variants in one go (static, dynamic, runtimes...)
> - Encoding these variants has to be reflected in the target names/aliases
CMake fundamentally doesn't work this way. Nor do any other build
systems I'm aware of. It's unique to b2. I do not think it useful to
require this of any replacement build system in consequence. Especially
when it's an initial minimalistic support as proposed here.
The variant naming strategy brings a lot of pain and it's something I
personally always turn off when I can, because all those name variants
result in having to hardcode b2-specific mappings for all the
combinations in every build system other than b2, **because only b2
defines the names this way**. It's truly horrible, and I don't know why
it's liked so much within the boost community. Am I the only one who
suffers so much from it having to integrate it with other systems on
multiple platforms?
Regards,
Roger