emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#28690: closed (provide a lib output for boost)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: bug#28690: closed (provide a lib output for boost)
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2022 15:18:03 +0000

Your message dated Sat, 08 Oct 2022 17:06:50 +0200
with message-id <86edvis6b9.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
and subject line Re: bug#28690: provide a lib output for boost
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #28690,
regarding provide a lib output for boost
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
28690: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=28690
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: provide a lib output for boost Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 17:34:41 +0100 User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
I mentioned elsewhere noticing the large size of boost in closures.
I've now realized what the problem was with making a lib output, and
done one, as below.  However, presumably it should have a dependency of
out on lib for compatibility, and I don't know the right way to do that.

The lib package is 17MiB, and the headers are 108MiB.

>From 1bb845d1d45ee7e8b9447bab902f3de41f0acfac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dave Love <fx@gnu.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 16:18:59 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: boost: Make a "lib" output.

This save about half the contribution to the Closure of things linked against
it,

* gnu/packages/boost.scm(outputs): Add lib.
(arguments)[mv-lib]: Add move the lib output into place after install.
---
 gnu/packages/boost.scm | 11 +++++++++--
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/boost.scm b/gnu/packages/boost.scm
index 4c7308e9d..c1e622fcd 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/boost.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/boost.scm
@@ -53,6 +53,7 @@
      `(("perl" ,perl)
        ("python" ,python-2)
        ("tcsh" ,tcsh)))
+    (outputs '("out" "lib"))
     (arguments
      `(#:tests? #f
        #:make-flags
@@ -60,7 +61,7 @@
 
              ;; Set the RUNPATH to $libdir so that the libs find each other.
              (string-append "linkflags=-Wl,-rpath="
-                            (assoc-ref %outputs "out") "/lib")
+                            (assoc-ref %outputs "lib") "/lib")
 
              ;; Boost's 'context' library is not yet supported on mips64, so
              ;; we disable it.  The 'coroutine' library depends on 'context',
@@ -99,7 +100,13 @@
          (replace
              'install
            (lambda* (#:key outputs make-flags #:allow-other-keys)
-             (zero? (apply system* "./b2" "install" make-flags)))))))
+             (zero? (apply system* "./b2" "install" make-flags))))
+         (add-after 'install 'mv-lib
+           (lambda _
+             (mkdir-p (assoc-ref %outputs "lib"))
+             (rename-file (string-append %output "/lib")
+                          (string-append (assoc-ref %outputs "lib")
+                                         "/lib")))))))
 
     (home-page "http://boost.org";)
     (synopsis "Peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries")
-- 
2.11.0


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#28690: provide a lib output for boost Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2022 17:06:50 +0200 User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
Hi,

On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 at 13:35, post@thomasdanckaert.be wrote:
> On 2022-06-23 12:01, zimoun wrote:
>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2022 at 03:30, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 at 16:45, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> This patch #28690 [1] is about adding an output to boost.  The aim is to
>>>> reduce the closure size.
>>>> The last message if from Dec. 2017 and indicates some issues.
>>>>
>>>> 1: <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/28690>

>>> Since some work remains and it is not clear if it is worth to complete
>>> such work about adding more outputs to boost, I plan to mark this report
>>> as ’donewontfix’.  Let me know if it is worth to keep it open.

>> Any objection closing?  If not, I will close it in 2 weeks.

> I'm no longer a very active contributor (or user :/), so not sure I'm the
> right person to judge this.  Reducing boost package size is a nice thing to
> do, but I'm not going to do the necessary work of building all (or at least a
> significant subset of) boost reverse dependencies to check if the approach
> above works, or if more changes are necessary.

I agree that the closure of boost deserve more love.

> I guess someone can always pick up the patch again when they feel the need for
> a smaller boost package.

Well, I am in favor to close it because it requires some work for
rebasing, etc. and the pending patches are such large that I am doubtful
people wanting to work on reducing the closure of boost will start to
look here. :-)


Cheers,
simon


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]