Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 18:28:46 +0400 From: Alexander Churanov <alexanderchuranov@gmail.com> To: Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>, lwhsu@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of devel/boost upgrade Message-ID: <3cb459ed0904070728w162d56dey1359c65c2394635d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <op.urzlgfhu9aq2h7@localhost> References: <3cb459ed0903270809s2da0fce7i66686a176d369931@mail.gmail.com> <20090331230246.GN1964@hades.panopticon> <op.urotvvn79aq2h7@localhost> <20090401113857.GO1964@hades.panopticon> <3cb459ed0904020821u3051c572l6461274ae7ff118b@mail.gmail.com> <20090402224413.GV1964@hades.panopticon> <3cb459ed0904030632x215f1e3n25363903a80b5639@mail.gmail.com> <20090403155011.GC60788@hades.panopticon> <op.urzlgfhu9aq2h7@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
OK, guys,
As I see everybody agrees on splitting boost into several ports and on
Boost.Python beeing a separate port. Let's proceed with option #2
("jam", "libs", "python-libs" and "docs").
Personally, I like the idea #4 of having source-libs and a port per a
shared library. I'd like to have another discussion on that when some
statistics on boost usage in ports is ready.
I have questions on how to perform this task:
1) Given that port freeze starts on 13th, are there any chances to
have boost-1.38 splitted into several packages in 7.2-RELEASE?
2) Is is permitted to test patch for updating to 1.38 with some ports,
not with all that depend on boost and then file a PR, specifying which
ports were tested? The aim is to omit building and testing some ports
(like openoffice) myself.
Sincerely,
Alexander Churanov,
maintainer of devel/boost
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3cb459ed0904070728w162d56dey1359c65c2394635d>