Re: boost-mpi package

[Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 03:36:28PM -0700, Brook Milligan wrote:
> A perfectly good reason and good rationale.  However, my knowledge of
> bjam is insufficient for me to split out individual libraries and tell
> them about dependencies that have already been built by other packages.
> If there is anyone who knows bjam well enough to do that and is willing
> to work on these packages, then please step up.

Sorry, not me either.

> There are four libraries involved: Boost.Serialization (serialization
> and wserialization), Boost.MPI (mpi), and Boost.Graph_Parallel
> (graph_parallel).  The dependency graph for these is as follows:
> 
>       serialization <- mpi <- graph_parallel
>       wserialization (not a dependency for anything)
> 
> Additionally, bjam allows control over the building of these libraries
> but always satisfies dependencies:
> 
> --with-serialization: builds both serialization and wserialization
> --with-mpi: builds mpi and serialization
> --with-graph_parallel: builds graph_parallel, mpi, and serialization
> 
> This raises the first question: should all of boost-libs depend on MPI
> by default?  My inclination is no, but I would like input.

I think boost should not depend on MPI by default.

> If so, then an MPI dependency can be added to boost-libs and the two
> new libraries (mpi and graph_parallel) will be built.
> 
> If not, then I think we need to split boost-libs as follows:
> 
> - boost-libs: remove serialization and wserialization
> - boost-serialization: provides serialization and wserialization
> - boost-mpi: provides serialization, wserialization, mpi,
>   and graph_parallel
> 
> The latter two would conflict with each other.

So I prefer this solution. The disadvantage is that (w)serialization
using packages would need to decide which of the two to depend on;
probably best by adding a two global conflicting pkgsrc options. Of
course this is only necessary if there are any serialization users. I
have no idea in that regard :) Do you know?

Cheers,
 Thomas