On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 1:24 PM Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Actually, as a user I do care and not in favor of CMake because there is always a possibility that Boost requires a newer CMake version that is not available on my platform.
This, too, concerns me. b2 builds on everything, and is included in every boost distribution. It is apparently built with such consideration that I can use it on ridiculously old versions of gcc without breaking a sweat. In cyber security, when training individuals, you find yourself using ridiculously old machines. We need, therefore, to be able to build software on these old machines. Watching this decision play out, I have concerns that I won't be able to do things like build boost on a 10-year-old distribution of debian using static libraries (so they work on all distributions based on this debian release), while also building boost for Windows XP on VC++ 2013 in a way that allows certain projects with fiddly settings compiler properly, yet still build for other version of Windows on the more recent compilers with more sane settings. I fully expect turbulence in the coming conversion to CMake for my admittedly non-standard setup. My hope is that this happens in at a measured pace allowing for edge cases line mine to weigh in without stopping newer fixes and contributions from entering the distribution. If there's some way I can set up a series of automated tests, I'd like to help. (Yes, observant folks might notice that I've mentioned this before, and appeared not to follow up... I did actually try to set up automated testing, but ran into problems, then failed to follow up with anyone about those problems because I got distracted by my job... but if this is moving to CMake, I expect I need to help). - Trey