C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: Defining Roles of Tools in Dependency Management

From: Daniel Ruoso <daniel_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:08:46 +0900
On Wed, Mar 20, 2024, 19:44 Boris Kolpackov via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]>

> I have doubts that it will be possible for the NxM
> case where each element on either side is controlled by an
> independent entity.

I think it is important to clarify that the goal here is not to come up
with the one system to rule them all.

For instance, let's consider a system like Debian, where you can rely on
the Linux filesystem hierarchy standard and with the fact that the
dependencies will be self consistent abi-wise.

In that case, producing a "target model" for satisfying dependencies for a
build system is fairly straightforward, in fact, we just need a richer
metadata format than what pkg-config does, but the principle of how it
works would be mostly sufficient.

However, if you look at the HPC environment, where ABI and Hardware
compatibility is managed in a completely different way, you wouldn't be
able to solve the problem the same way.

The immediate goal here, given the above, is just to establish an
interoperability language that would allow the different systems used on
those environments to tell the build system (e.g.: cmake) what is the
"target model" for the libraries being provided.



Received on 2024-03-20 11:08:59