From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-27 15:39:34
--- In jamboost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> > The documentation mentions this in a few different places.
> In no case does the documentation use this form in the requirements
> of a target description. Requirements are meant to be constraints.
> it mean to "require" static/dynamic?
Ah... I see. Disconnect on my part. It's in the build section, not
the requirements section.
> > OK, but for builds the <runtime-link>static/dynamic *IS* currently
> > documented as the correct way to do this, and it would be better
> > the two behaved in the same manner here.
> We're talking at cross-purposes. Does separating the idea of
> from the idea of a build-request clear things up at all?
Yes. Now I guess the point (beyond the link bug in the build system
for <dll>) is that I think a build section/rule variable should be
included in the regression tests. It's important that I be able to
insure the various subvariants compile, link, and pass runtime
tests. This will become more important if I can turn pthread-win32
support into a variant on Windows platforms.
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk