Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-13 13:00:00

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]>

> > Me too. I'll try to devote as much attention as possible; I'm a bit
> > right now, though.
> I'm hoping that once we'll be able to compile a simple program under gcc,
> someone interested in Boost.Build might want to contribute.

Once we get to that point, I'll want to contribute too <wink>!

> > I think lots of different interfaces have been discussed. Someone asked
> > one point why he could just type "bjam gcc" and have it build with gcc.
> > Maybe --build="..." and --toolset="..." are just distractions; Maybe we
> > distinguish all of these things from target names, so users could
> >
> > bjam gcc borland release debug my_target your_target <inlining>off
> >
> > Then "my_target" would actually be a way to spell the "my_target" value
> > the implicit feature <target>.
> Oh... that would only require that target names do not clash with toolset
> build variants

...or that there's a way of disambiguating...

> Okay with me.
> But... Can we handle command line arguments? Won't they be
> treated as target names by jam?

It's easy enough to cause the argument to be turned into a NOTFILE target
with no special updating actions.

> So, is the following okay?
> 1. If command line mentions any toolset, we using the build request from
> command line verbatim, otherwise we add a "default" set of toolsets.

I think that's what I had in mind. The user should of course be able to
specify what the defaults are in user-config.jam/site-config.jam. Toolsets
will also provide a facility to automatically find out whether/where they
are installed, so the defaults can be automatically determined.

> 2. default-build is used when command line either specifies no build
> or specifies only toolsets.

I think you mean the default variant? I really am looking at toolset as
just-another-property, when viewed from the perspective of build requests.

> default-build cannot specify toolsets (it seems unreasonable)

Why? I wouldn't do it, but someone might want to.

> it is augmented with either the default set of toolsets or the toolsets
> in the command line.

That part's fine with me.



Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at