Re: [jamboost] Re: <link> issues solved?

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-09 01:47:40

Markus Schöpflin wrote:

>>2. By using "source" rule as I've described in a previous message:
>>
>> source zlib : /path/to/zlib/installation/zlib : <shared>false ;
>>
>>As Dave said: "So you're using "source" as a way of adding a level of
>>indirection with attached bulid requirements?"
> 
> 
> Understood. Maybe we should think of a new name for the source rule then.
> After all, it can do a lot more than just hold a collection of sources now.
> I can't think of a really good name right now, but maybe something like
> 'module' or 'alias'. The latter might be a good choice, after all the rule
> aliases a name with a set of sources or libraries and/or build requirements.

True, "alias" is more general name. We could use both "source" or "alias"
for convenience, or only "alias" to keep the interface simple. I'm for "alias"
only.

>>The last detail: <link> will be a composite feature and
>><link>static will expand to
>><link>static <link-runtime>static.
>>
>>Therefore, <link>static will really make everything static.
>>OTOH, it's possible to override <link-runtime> explicitly.
> 
> 
> Won't you have a problem with the recursive definition? Just asking.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean.

Probably, something like
1. <link>shared <link-runtime>static in build request
2. <link>shared in some requirements, which overrides
<link-runtime>static
?

This could be problem, we'll have to think about it.

Or is there another issue?

- Volodya