From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-21 11:11:24
"Raoul Gough" <raoulgough_at_[hidden]> writes:
> I've come up with a new gcc-nocygwin-tools.jam, which contains only
> the following code:
> extends-toolset gcc ;
> CFLAGS += -mno-cygwin ;
> C++FLAGS += -mno-cygwin ;
> LINKFLAGS += -mno-cygwin ;
> This requires an up-to-date gcc-tools.jam (since 2003/01/17) and an
> up-to-date Cygwin gcc installation (support was added around October
> 2002, according to my information). I've posted the new documentation
> at http://home.clara.net/raoulgough/boost/gcc-nocygwin-tools.html
> Contrary to my initial reckoning, using gcc-tools.jam and setting
> <cxxflags> on the command line does *not* work correctly, because it
> confuses python.jam into thinking it has a Cygwin Python installation
> (you need a Windows native Python for use with -mno-cygwin).
> There seem to be some problems with building the Boost test libraries,
> both with gcc-nocygwin and native mingw. See the attached traces for
> details. I guess these problems are caused by differences between Unix
> and Windows shared library linkage styles, but I haven't really
> investigated (seems like it was already broken, since the mingw
> toolset has exactly the same problems).
> If there are no objections, I'll check the new nocygwin support into
> CVS at the end of the week.
Thanks for the thorough investigation!
Your approach doesn't provide for people who want to use an older
cygwin compiler with STLPort and -mno-cygwin, does it? I forgot how
our conversation about this was going. Did we decide it wasn't
-- David Abrahams dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk