From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-10-10 13:13:27
David Abrahams wrote:
>>On SGI, jam compiled fined (after setting the executable flag on
>>'yyacc'). Some time ago, you agreed with my proposition to provide
>>jam-executables to the boost users for the most popular platforms. Do I
>>already check in the SGI version and where ?
> I'm not sure yet. What do you think?
Well you know my point of view. Boost Users should be able to build
boost at their site with a minimum of hassle. If the installation is not
configure ; make ; make install, it should at least be as simple.
Including the jam-executable in the boost download package helps to make
local installation simple.
Maybe we should ask Boost-Users what they prefer ?
>>On HP (HP-UX 10.20) I did not succeed in building 'jam0' since 'alloca'
>>is an undefined symbol. I have searched through all system libraries but
>>could not find a definition of alloca. The man page directed me to an
>>old library which neither defined 'alloca'. I found some information on
>>the web though confirming that 'alloca' is indeed missing on (some / all
>>?) HP-UX machines together with an open-source implementation of the
> OK, the use of alloca is part of code in jamgram.c, which is generated by
> gnu bison, the only version of yacc that I have on my system. If you look at
> the previously-checked-in version of jamgram.c, which was generated by some
> other yacc, you'll see that there's no use of alloca. If there is a yacc on
> your HP machine, it could be used to generate a new jamgram.c, which, I
> imagine, would not use alloca.
Funny thing is that I've built everything locally, so I used the yacc
provided by HP.
I'll keep you up to date about trying out the workarounds next time I've
access to the IBM and HP (only few days a week)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk