Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-30 00:06:36

Rene Rivera <grafik666_at_[hidden]> writes:

> [2002-10-29] David Abrahams wrote:
> >Rene Rivera <grafik666_at_[hidden]> writes:
> >
> >> prefered compiler in Win32... CodeWarrior. So I decided to add support
> for
> >> that, but after seeing all the various build scripts and instructions in
> >> jam_src I got frustrated at trying to change the Jambase to support it.
> So I
> >> decided to write a new set of scripts to compile jam(bjam) instead.
> >
> >I'm extremely excited about this effort! I definitely think we should
> >do something like this.
> :-)
> >I'm also traveling at the moment and
> >preoccupied with many obligations and other things. However, I intend
> >to focus on Boost install/build issues starting 11/2. If you feel you
> >haven't got enough feedback by that time, please raise the issue
> >again.
> Will do. I'm going bird watching, an extremely strage thing for me to do,
> over the weekend so I won't get back to this till the 4th.
> >Have you considered using the Jam extensions for examining the
> >windows registry (one of the other Perforce users did it) to locate
> >the compiler to build bjam with?
> No, had completely forgotten about that... but unfortunaly I don't think it
> helps in this case :-( As the guessing for the compiler is done outside of
> Jam, in the After all "b/jam" isn't built yet ;-) --
> bootstrapping is always a pain.

Oh, of course ;-)

Well, can your work be checked in without breaking anything? I am
thinking about making Boost 1.29.1 an "officially installable and
testable" release (whatever that means). Would you recommend switching
to your new stuff for 1.29.1, or would that be premature?


David Abrahams
dave_at_[hidden] *

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