Re: [boost] regression: run_tests.sh

From: Rene Rivera (grafik666_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-21 14:39:24

[2003-01-21] David Abrahams wrote:

>Toon Knapen <toon.knapen_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> On Tuesday 21 January 2003 16:30, Rene Rivera wrote:
>>> BUt I can't figure out why it doesn't detect the toolset? All the
build.sh
>>> does is check to see if "xlc" is in the path. 
>> I can confirm that xlc is in the path. So that's not it. Note though that 
>> calling 'xlc' without arguments will launch the manpages and thus you
need to 
>> type 'q' to get to your prompt again.
>>
>>> Or do you mean that it uses
>>> some other toolset to build bjam?
>> Nope, no gcc is installed so it uses xlc or xlC.
>
>In general, invoking a compiler without arguments is likely to produce
>strange results.  Many just give an error.  On Sun, for example, if
>you want to know the version you have to give a filename, even if it
>doesn't exist.  Maybe we should be doing this detection slightly
>differently.

The script doesn't invoke the compiler to check if it's in the path. It just
asks the shell if it's in the PATH directories.

Specifically it test the result of "hash xlc", in this case.

So it could be that the "hash" command doesn't work in AIX as I expected.

-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera_at_[hidden] - grafik_at_[hidden]
-- 102708583_at_icq