Re: First cut at a SHELL command for bjam

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-24 15:11:01

Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>David Abrahams wrote:
>
>>>>Why? For people using older BB?
>>>
>>>I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "older BB", but my
>>>reasons are:
>> 
>> A Boost.Build that isn't yet using the new SHELL feature.
>
> Ah, in that case, yes that's the reason.
>
>>>1. For people who only have access to a compiler which doesn't have 
>>>popen and we don't have a prebuilt bjam available. They will follow the 
>>>instructions and try to compile it, and fail. Not a good way to get started.
>> 
>> But if Boost.Build is using SHELL, the failure to compile bjam is just
>> the first of a long string of problems, no?
>
> Yes. But I can't commit the patch now as it has the potential of 
> breaking for the 1.33 release which is an "older BB". 

There are always branches.

> I'll be checking in something close to Craig's latest patch
> though. Now that it has a way to turn off the feature :-) (And I'll
> turn it on in the cases we know it works)

I would think we'd want to know sooner rather than later that it
wasn't supported, no? 

Unless we only plan to use SHELL for "non-critical" features, I just
don't understand the point in making bjam build without it.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com