Re: Bug#712056: RFS: scantailor [ITP] -- interactive post-processing tool for scanned document pages
>> My POV is: As you already found the error (line 295), your conclusion
>> is wrong. You have 1.49.0.1, but cmake searches for 1.35.
My POV is wrong :( (see below)
> $ grep -n -i boost CMakeLists.txt
> 74:INCLUDE(FindBoost)
> 152:FILE(GLOB boost_dirs1 "${build_outer_dir}/boost_1_[0-9]*_[0-9]*")
> 153:FILE(GLOB boost_dirs2 "${source_outer_dir}/boost_1_[0-9]*_[0-9]*")
> 286: BOOST_ROOT boost-build.jam PATHS ${boost_dirs1}
${boost_dirs2}
> 287: DOC "Path to top-level Boost source directory."
> 289: SET(Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS ON)
> 291: ADD_DEFINITIONS(-DBOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK)
> 294:SET(Boost_USE_MULTITHREADED ON)
> 295:FIND_PACKAGE(Boost 1.35.0 COMPONENTS unit_test_framework
prg_exec_monitor)
> 296:FIND_PACKAGE(Boost 1.49.0 COMPONENTS unit_test_framework
prg_exec_monitor)
> 297:FIND_PACKAGE(Boost 1.49.0)
> 298:FIND_PACKAGE(Boost 1.49.1 COMPONENTS unit_test_framework
prg_exec_monitor)
> 299:IF(NOT Boost_FOUND)
> 302: "Could not find boost headers or libraries.\n"
> 303: "You may need to install a package named
libboost1.35-dev or later."
> 305:ENDIF(NOT Boost_FOUND)
You are close here - but I still disagree slightly. As I understand things,
the problem is the incompatibility between the upstream code (above) and the
Debian version - 1.49.0 vs 1.49.0.1.
> You are right and I am confused. Boost has already been found at the
> beginning but this is forgotten later. I learn, that FIND_PACKAGE
> overrides all former states even if it was found already.
> Also from [1] I learned that FIND_PACKAGE does not fail because of the
> higher version as EXACT is not set, but as you can see in the following
> it is about the COMPONENTS.
> $ cmake .
> -- Boost version: 1.49.0
> -- Could NOT find Boost
> -- Could NOT find Boost
> -- Boost version: 1.49.0
> -- Could NOT find Boost
> CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:300 (MESSAGE):
> Could not find boost headers or libraries.
"but this is forgotten later". Take it as nitpicking - there is a difference
between "not used" and "forgotten". But the *effect* is the same - FTBFS.
Martin
Reply to: