Re: [boost] [build] bootstrap.sh is still broken

Subject: Re: [boost] [build] bootstrap.sh is still broken
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-21 13:38:20

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 21.10.2013 21:03, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
>
>> [STL]
>>
>>> http://lists.boost.org/boost-**build/2013/10/27025.php
>

>>>
>>
>> [Rene Rivera]
>>
>>> Could you post the diff patches as attachments? It's almost impossible to
>>> deal with inline diffs to apply these. Even though I can't test any of
>>> this. I'm willing to apply the patches.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks! Download this: http://nuwen.net/stuff/boost-**bootstrap.patch
>
>>
>> As I explained in my mail, the diff for boost_1_54_0/bootstrap.sh is a
>> horrible hack and should not be applied. It fixes mingw but breaks
>> everyone
>> else. I would love to get a real fix for this, but someone would have to
>> investigate.
>>
>> The diffs for boost_1_54_0/tools/build/v2/**engine/build.jam and
>> boost_1_54_0/tools/build/v2/**engine/build.sh should be applied - they
>> fix
>> mingw and should not affect anyone else.
>>
>> [Vladimir Prus]
>>
>>> And on the mingw topic, I might have missed something, but I think the
>>>
>> major
>>
>>> issue is still mingw vs. gcc naming inconsistency between bootstrap.sh
>>> and b2 proper - which is ugly, but not quite a showstopper?
>>>
>>
>> That's what my boost_1_54_0/bootstrap.sh diff is hacking around. It's a
>> showstopper in the sense that it completely breaks the build, and I
>> haven't
>> figured out how to evade it with command-line arguments.
>>
>
> Ok. Rene, Steven, how about we s/mingw/gcc throughout b2 engine source?
>

Fine by me.. But since I no longer have, or can get setup, a MinGW install
it's not something I will be able to test at all :-(

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