From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-20 04:30:20
Felix E. Klee wrote:
> On Thursday 16 January 2003 02:09 pm, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>I've just added preliminary QT support to CVS. I'm now able to
>>cd to examples-v2/qt, run "bjam" there, and obtain an working
>>Felix, can you check it out, first with gcc, and then with Kylix?
> Phew, I finally found the time for testing. However, a gcc based build doesn't
> yet work for me because the linker cannot find the QT library:
> You should add "-L$(QTDIR)/lib" to the gcc command line when qt compilation is
> turned on. I haven't yet tried it out with Kylix because it sure suffers from
> the same problem (BTW, bc++ also understands the -L option).
I've tried to fix that. Can you please check again?
> I had a look at the Jamfile and it looks very good and seems to be very easy
> to use. However, as several people, among them yourself, pointed out in the
> thread "Adding QT support to Boost Build V2" it really isn't a good idea to
> introduce that ".qpp" extension. As I already explained to Jürgen, the moc
> can be seen as a tool in the spirit of Doxygen that processes regular C++
> files and extracts information from them. So leaving the header file
> extension at ".h" (or ".hpp", maybe) actually does make more sense from that
> point of view. After all, we don't want to use a different extension for each
> header file that is to be processed by a certain tool.
OK, I'll change that.
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