Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Raoul Gough (raoulgough_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-21 15:57:54

"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "Raoul Gough" <raoulgough_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > I've come up with a new gcc-nocygwin-tools.jam, which contains
> > the following code:
> >
> > extends-toolset gcc ;
> > CFLAGS += -mno-cygwin ;
> > C++FLAGS += -mno-cygwin ;
> > LINKFLAGS += -mno-cygwin ;
> >
> > This requires an up-to-date gcc-tools.jam (since 2003/01/17) and
> > up-to-date Cygwin gcc installation (support was added around
> > 2002, according to my information). I've posted the new
> > at
> Your approach doesn't provide for people who want to use an older
> cygwin compiler with STLPort and -mno-cygwin, does it? I forgot how
> our conversation about this was going. Did we decide it wasn't
> important?

Well, I wasn't planning to test support for this, because I no longer
have an STLport installation. David, have you got a suitable
installation of STLport to try this on? It *might* be as simple as
changing extends-toolset "gcc" to "gcc-stlport" in the nocygwin
toolset, in which case a gcc-nocygwin-stlport-tools.jam would be
trivial to write. I've got no idea how many people would benefit from
this, though.

BTW, the C++FLAGS modification seems to be redundant, since the C++
commands use the CFLAGS as well. I assume that using += is
fundamentally a legitimate way to make this change (i.e. it won't
prevent the user supplying their own flags as well)?

Raoul Gough.

Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts


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