From: Jürgen Hunold (hunold+lists.Boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-26 02:50:26
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi Vladimir !
On Tuesday 25 February 2003 10:07, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > The src/Jamfile specifies <include>../include for both
> > requirements and usage-requirements. So I should be able to
> > include all headers from libx by using <libx/header.h>
> That's right.
Good to hear ;-)
> Usage requirements on libx are applied only to main targets which
> use it. However, you can cause all main targets to be linked with
> libx: just add <library>/some-path/libx to requirements. If you
> don't want to link all targets, but want to add includes for all of
> them, you can try <dependency>/some-path/libx in requirements. This
> should add usage-requirements, and make all main target depend in
> libx, but library won't be linked unless explicitly asked.
This clarifies things. But I think I should be able to
use <library>@/libx or <depedency>@/libx, shouldn't I ?
> The only problem is that it does not work :-( Thanks to your
> example I've found the problem, and the planned fix goes very
> well together with a couple of other changes I'm planning.
> I'll let you know when it works.
Great. I feared the I composed the test for good.
> > Is this a bug, feature or am I misinterpreting the docs ?
> I think the latter. Could you tell what parts of docs lead you
> to the conclusion you have, so that we could clarify them?
Well, the docs ("tools/build/boost_build_v2.html" only state:
| When linking the "app" binary,the needed library will be used. But
| what is meant by "needed"?"
The following section describes how the "usage-requirements" work. It
simply does not say anything about building your own libraries. So I
thought bjam would do some magic by simply using "use-project". Well,
I was wrong. And the <depedency> rule is not mentioned there.
Are there more docs available ? I would like to learn more about the
bjam internals. Can you drop me a link (or two) where to start
> I believe it's fixed now. The bug was that you could not initialize
> the QT toolset twice. Now it's possible, provided you give the same
> installation prefix.
Confirmed. Works for me. Well, using the same QTDIR is a necessary
Thanks for your help !
* Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold ! Institut für Verkehrswesen,
* voice: ++49 511 762-2529 ! und -betrieb, Universität Hannover
* fax : ++49 511 762-3001 ! Appelstrasse 9a, D-30167 Hannover
* hunold_at_[hidden] ! www.ive.uni-hannover.de
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
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