I had an explicit main target rule named jar, and an action named jar. Upon further reflection, I guess it tried to invoke the rule I wrote as a main target rule a second time in the context of preparing to run the action.
The error message really didn't give any clue to help find the problem. Perhaps enforcing a rule signature for the action-rules is worth consideration.
On Tuesday 11 August 2009 John Bito wrote:
> I found it. Since my action was named jar, it tried to invoke the
> main-target rule named jar, so it's not surprising it didn't do what I
> wanted.
>
> I wonder if it's worthwhile to try and issue a warning if a module's
> top-level rule is overwritten. Then I could just be sure to write an
> explicit rule for every action and I'd be told when I was causing a
> problem.
So, did you have two 'jar' functions in the same 'java' module?
- Volodya
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-build