Re: [boost] [modular-boost] Development procedures

Subject: Re: [boost] [modular-boost] Development procedures
From: Bjørn Roald (bjorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-03 15:49:47

On 02/03/2014 05:29 PM, Edward Diener wrote:
> On 2/3/2014 11:00 AM, Vyacheslav Andrejev wrote:
>> Hello Gennadiy,
>>
>>>> can run "b2 headers" again. If we were using soft links we wouldn't
>>>> have this problem, I thought there was consensus to do that, but no
>>>> one seems to be doing it.
>>>>
>> GR> There is no soft links on Windows.
>>
>> 1. There are soft links in Windows. See documentation for mklink /D.
>
> mklink without any option creates a file symbolic link.
>
>> 2. This is exactly what b2 tries to do: create soft links. Only it
>> fails, since in Windows you need elevated privileges by default to do
>> this. Then b2 falls back to creating hard links to files, since it
>> cannot create soft links to directories.
>
> It does not test whether the user has administrator priveleges or not on
> Windows in order to create file symbolic links.

What test are you suggesting and what should b2 do given each result of 
that test?

> I have brought this issue many times before in various posts. The 'b2
> headers' command should always create symbolic links if possible, not
> hard links which are problematical in our modular-boos setup. Each time
> I have brought up this issue I have been told we are waiting for
> modular-boost issues itself to be fully resolved. We are evidently still
> waiting.

This thread is more about credentials on windows than the more general 
questions we have debated on the preference on use of hardlinks over 
symlinks to files in current "b2 headers".  I think there are more or 
less consensus that it will be better to use symlinks also for files, 
but Beman asked for requirements and time to let the modularization dust 
settle before we made changes.  I have not got any feedback on the 
requirements I posted, and there have as far as I have noted been a few, 
but not many reported real problems with hardlinks.  So rushing this may 
not be warranted.  Nevertheless, that should not prevent you from trying 
preference for symlinks in "b2 headers" if you need to, and report results.

End-note:  this thread started with a problem related to symlinks not 
working as expected on Windows, so the changes you say we are waiting on 
would likely not resolve anything here.

--
Bjørn