Re: boost, BOOST_HAS_VARIADIC_TMPL and std=c++0x

[David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 02:39:32PM -0400, Julio Merino wrote:
 > To be frank, Boost is a constant source of problems on arbitrary
 > platforms.  Sure, by switching to Boost.Config we may uncover
 > other/more problems, but I don't think it will make things
 > significantly worse.
 > 
 > I'd like someone else's opinion on this though before even trying
 > to make the packages not use the autoconf alternative.  Maybe Brook
 > can comment?

My opinion is that given what Boost is, what it does, and the problems
to be expected for it, we're better off wiring down its configuration
as much as possible. It's hard enough trying to figure out wtf is
going on in the C++ when something fails; wading through to figure out
what its configuration system did to you as well will only make it
that much worse.

I already pretty much avoid package failures that involve Boost,
though, so take this for what it's worth.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost