I'll be happy to test with the set of compilers we use when there is a release candiate. (MSVC, GCC MinGW, GCC Linux, GCC ARM)
Regarding build system, if inclusion in Boost is still a goal, will there be a fully integrated boost.build setup? I'm already building SOCI using Boost.Build on our local version. Being able to both depend upon and compile SOCI by adding a /SOCI//SOCI and /SOCI//SOCI_SQLite dependancy (for SOCI + SQLite) is very powerful. Christian On 2/25/2010 1:13 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote: > Artyom wrote: >>> Folks, >>> >>> I'm working on the build system now and I will call for >>> testing >>> this week yet. As soon as we & users are happy it works >>> for most >>> major environments, I'll prepare release. >>> >>> >> >> Hello, >> >> 1st of all I'd be glad to test new build system. > > Artyom, first of all, I want to say I greatly appreciate your feedback. > I've planned to submit RFC this week, hopefully it will happen > tonight or tomorrow. > The reason why I have not announce it yet, is that I have a couple > of features missing from current CMake-based build, so I did > wanted to avoid bad impressions :-) > >> Few requests: >> >> - I've looked to the current state of CMake builds, I've seen that >> only shared libraries are build and no static builds are performed. >> >> I would strongly recommend and request to add static libraries build >> as well. > > Yes, you are right. I have planned to add static libraries, of course. > Simply, I'm in the middle of solving general compilation settings > and juggling backend-common and backend-specific dependencies. > It's nearly done. > >> Take a look into there: >> >> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ#Can_I_build_both_shared_and_static_libraries_with_one_ADD_LIBRARY_command.3F >> >> Especially note this: >> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ#How_do_I_make_my_shared_and_static_libraries_have_the_same_root_name.2C_but_different_suffixes.3F > > Thank you, I'll check both and follow any good recommendation from > CMake folks, certainly. > >> This update was added after a bug I reported on library name collision >> under MSVC. > > Please, note, I have not tested the CMake build with Visual > Studio/Visual C++. I'm usually crafting first prototype on Linux > and when this is ready, I move to tests on Windows. > Linux-based sandbox usually allows faster progress with build systems, > due to the fact filesystem is unified, so dependencies are easier > available and detectable. Nevertheless, Windows is as important > development environment as Unix, so no worries. > >> - Is there any options to disable specific backends? Because I had just >> tried to make simple build under Cygwin it CMake failed with: > > Yes, it is obvious and must-have feature and I'm adding it. > Current version in Git repo does not make backends to self-configure > depending on available dependencies - work in progress, as I mentioned. > >> - I have a small virtual server farm with XP, Solaris, FreeBSD >> so I can test it on several platforms, before final release. >> >> See platforms that I usually test: >> http://cppcms.sourceforge.net/wikipp/en/page/cppcms_1x_platforms for my own >> project so I can provide some testing before final release. > > Wonderful your help would be extremely helpful. > >> Artyom >> >> P.S.: What about the patch I had send few weeks ago? > > Could you remind me please? > > Best regards, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Soci-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users
