kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/12/2016 2:15 PM, Michael Steinberg wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
>>> 1. Boost 1.61 compatibility and bugfix?
>>> 2. Release version string.
>>>
>>> Should the release should include the boost 1.61 fix. It was
>>> discussed in:
>>> [Kicad-developers] About Bug 1604841: Pcbnew crash at moving via, and
>>> boost::context fixes to make it compatible with boost 1.61
>>>
>>> And there is a patch in [1], although it does not explicitly state
>>> where it is from, but it looks similar to [2] and [3]. With out the
>>> patch in [1] I can not build it against boost 1.62 on archlinux.
>>> [...]
>>> [1]https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/boost-1.61.patch?h=packages/kicad
>>>
>>> [2]https://git.launchpad.net/kicad/commit/?id=06d4894fdbeb00727cdcc667b8899ad73d8eb1c2
>>>
>>> [3]https://git.launchpad.net/kicad/commit/?id=78bc3c65de6c03d19be9902327d08cd4d87c229c
>>>
> Regarding patches 1-3:
> 
> I'm still here reading mostly and supporting those patches, just that
> I've been busy finding a job and a project is going on too. So in short,
> these three patches, although commited individually actually belong
> together in the retrospective. Nothing has changed with regard to the
> fact that the public interface of boost::context requires c++11
> compilation beginning with boost version 1.61, that's why it was decided
> to not apply them to stable back then.
> 
> The now-encapsulated-and-moved-to-detail parts of boost::context that
> Kicad uses for boost versions < 1.61 are actually still there, so it
> might be possible to use those, but it might also be the case that it's
> not possible to hide the c++11 header parts from the compiler when using
> them. Not even considering I think it would *really* not be a wise
> decision to rely on implementation details, especially looking into the
> future.
> 
> I think it would be best to just tell people they need to use a recent
> compiler (and the according standard switch) if they also want to use a
> recent boost and apply these patches to stable, iff there is a growing
> demand/complain-rate. But I will also try to help/assist/... finding a
> different solution, if it is in demand.
> 
> Cheers!
> Michael
> 

Hi Michael,

I understand you dilemma and appreciate any help you can provide.  If
you can complete a solution to fix the boost context code without the
c++11 code, I will merge it into the stable branch (even if it has to be
part of a 4.0.6 version).  If not, we will just have to live with a 4
stable branch that cannot be built with boost >= 1.61.

Thanks,

Wayne