cmake: Remove Boost::system from UHDConfig.cmake component list - #939
Open
doronbehar wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
cmake: Remove Boost::system from UHDConfig.cmake component list#939doronbehar wants to merge 1 commit into
Boost::system from UHDConfig.cmake component list#939doronbehar wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Boost.System has been header-only since Boost 1.69, and as of Boost 1.89 its CMake package config was removed entirely.[1] This makes the `find_dependency(Boost ... COMPONENTS ... system ...)` call in the installed `UHDConfig.cmake` fail on any downstream project that does `find_package(UHD)` while linked against `Boost >= 1.89`. Timeline of how this happened, for reference: - Up to and including v4.9.0.1, UHDConfig.cmake.in had no Boost dependency check at all. - ab724a3 introduced the `find_dependency(Boost ... COMPONENTS ... system ...)` call here, to correctly declare Boost as a transitive dependency of the newly added `UHD::uhd` imported target. - c45c296 fixed UHD's own build to stop requiring `Boost::system`, in response to it being dropped as of Boost 1.89. That commit did not touch `UHDConfig.cmake.in`, which had only just gained its own separate `Boost::system` reference ten days earlier via ab724a3, and so was missed. - `v4.10.0.0` ships with both commits, making it the first release where `UHDConfig.cmake.in`'s Boost dependency check exists but still lists `system`, breaking `find_package(UHD)` for any consumer linked against Boost >= 1.89. [1]: boostorg/system@7a495bb
|
CLA Assistant Lite bot All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅ |
Author
|
I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA |
Author
|
recheck |
8 tasks
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Boost.System has been header-only since Boost 1.69, and as of Boost 1.89 its CMake package config was removed entirely.
This makes the
find_dependency(Boost ... COMPONENTS ... system ...)call in the installedUHDConfig.cmakefail on any downstream project that doesfind_package(UHD)while linked againstBoost >= 1.89.Timeline of how this happened, for reference:
find_dependency(Boost ... COMPONENTS ... system ...)call here, to correctly declare Boost as a transitive dependency of the newly addedUHD::uhdimported target.Boost::system, in response to it being dropped as of Boost 1.89. That commit did not touchUHDConfig.cmake.in, which had only just gained its own separateBoost::systemreference ten days earlier via ab724a3, and so was missed.v4.10.0.0ships with both commits, making it the first release whereUHDConfig.cmake.in's Boost dependency check exists but still listssystem, breakingfind_package(UHD)for any consumer linked against Boost >= 1.89.Which devices/areas does this affect?
Packaging & Distribution.
Testing Done
Built
gnuradio, and configuring thegr-uhdcomponent has detected the UHD package correctly.Checklist
MPM compat, noc_shell, specific RFNoC block, ...)