Re: [boost] [Boost-maint] [context, config] Always setting address-model and architecture (Was: Conflicts when building libraries at root)

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-maint] [context, config] Always setting address-model and architecture (Was: Conflicts when building libraries at root)
From: Jürgen Hunold (jhunold_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-02-18 11:10:34

Am Mittwoch, 18. Februar 2015, 18:58:01 schrieb Vladimir Prus:
> On 02/18/2015 05:55 PM, Jürgen Hunold wrote:
> > I thought the correct way would be to move the architecture detection
> > upwards?

> That's roughly what I propose, too - but there are few further tweaks and
> options.

> > We would need something along those lines (from context/bulld/Jamfile.v2)
> > 
> > alias select_asm_context_sources
> > 
> >    : asm_context_sources
> >    : [ architecture.architecture ]
> >    : 
> >      [ architecture.address-model ]
> >    
> >    ;
> > 
> > in boostcpp.jam in order to detect the architecture everywhere. It would
> > then be helpfull to have sensible default values in order to shorten the
> > generated paths for those defaults.
> 
> Right, so steps would be:
> 
> 1. Move actual tests into config (we do need to have a few cpp files)
> 2. Move architecture.jam into either Boost.Build or boostcpp.jam
> 3. Make sure we don't generate extra path elements for default address model
> 4. Introduce a way to do these tests without requiring a bunch of .cpp
> files - sure Boost.Build can generate them on the fly.
> 5. Make these checks be automatic for all projects.
> 
> It seems that 1-2 should solve the immediate problem, and 1-3 should be
> pretty good, although going all the way to 5 would be cool.

+1 for this plan.

And it would be cool if 3 enables me to use "feature.set-default address-model 
: 64" on Windows 64 bit machines to enforce 64 bit builds as default. Or maybe 
just auto-detect it...

> > Another solution would be to generate a "header-only" variant of
> > Boost.System and use this nearly everywhere. This would solve *lots* of
> > dependency problems...
> 
> Not sure I have an opinion on that.

I just wanted to mention it. I've tried this way but it quickly gets dirty as 
soon as one gets both "header-only" and library.
So -2 for this solution.

Yours,

Jürgen

-- 
* Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold  ! 
* voice: ++49 4257 300       ! Fährstraße 1
* fax  : ++49 4257 300       ! 31609 Balge/Sebbenhausen
* jhunold_at_gmx.eu             ! Germany