Re: [boost] another bjam question -- and includes search order

From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-01 00:49:03

Rene Rivera wrote:

> John Maddock wrote:
> 
>>> Well here's the strange aspect of this; I tested this exact 
>>> configuration before putting those changes in and I get different 
>>> results than you do. Running with latest CVS, and bjam 3.1.10 I get 
>>> for the above compile this:
>>
>>
>> [snipped]
>>
>>> Which as you can see doesn't include the VC include path.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's not what I see, I opened up a Visual studio command prompt and:
>>
>> C:\data\boost\develop\boost>set BOOST_ROOT=c:\data\boost\develop\boost
>>
>> C:\data\boost\develop\boost>set TOOLS=vc7.1-stlport
>>
>> C:\data\boost\develop\boost>set STLPORT_PATH=c:\download\open\stlport
>>
>> C:\data\boost\develop\boost>cd libs\config\test
>>
>> C:\data\boost\develop\boost\libs\config\test>bjam -a -d2 config_test
> 
> 
> Thanks John, I managed to reproduce the problem now. I'll try and fix it 
> tonight.

OK, it's fixed for all toolsets. But since I can't test all toolsets I 
don't know if my changes will break other things. If they do, it will 
need to be fixed when that comes up. As a warning the big change was the 
mixed use of STD headers and system (<sysinclude>) headers.

By the way as I changed all the toolsets I noticed that they all set up 
the includes paths in this order:

        1. user includes
        2. standard includes
        3 system includes (this one I just added to fix the above issue)

But I would have thought that the order should be:

        1. standard includes
        2. system includes
        3. user includes

Is this a real problem that should be fixed, or am I just hallucinating?

-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq