Re: [jamboost] Re: Boost.Build V2, Milestone 3 preview

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-25 11:59:34

"klapshin" <klapshin_at_[hidden]> writes:

> --- In jamboost_at_[hidden], Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_c...> wrote:
>> I would appreciate if several persons not actively involved in development try 
>> to grab the files and install them, to the degree where "hello" example 
>> project is buildable. It should be possible with gcc, msvc and borland 
>> compilers. This way we can catch apparent bugs in packaging and installation 
>> docs, before announcing the release for everybody.
>
> I tried msvc; bjam builds just fine, hello example passed
> successfully, but libraries failed because no single function were
> exported from dll and hence no .lib file created. After adding
>
> #ifdef _MSC_VER
> __declspec(dllexport)
> #endif
>
> to foo() in lib1.cpp test suceeded with warning
>
> targets.jam:686: in check-for-unused-sources from module
> object(typed-target)@1
> warning: Unused source target { msvc.link-lib1.SHARED_LIB {
> builtin.response-fil
> e-lib1.RSP { msvc.compile-lib1.OBJ { lib1.CPP } } } }
> Main target is app/app
>
> The real problem though that automatic search for compiler seems to be
> broken. 

Strange, it used to work.

> In order to run the test I had to ran vcvars32 prior to
> calling bjam. Otherwise bjam have not even tried to load it from
> default location. I tried to debug it, and as far as I can see from
> the -d+5 log, vendor subfeature is being set to "intel", which
> prevents from running automatic detection logic. And I don't set
> vendor in user-config!
>
> After commenting lines 16 through 21 in msvc.jam I made it leave
> vendor empty, and msvc.init correctly set setup variable to default
> location of vcvars32.bat

OK, then someone broke default handling of optional features while I
wasn't looking...

just putting

using msvc : <some-version-number> ; 

in your xxx-config.jam file should be enough to fix the problem
without modifying anything.

> however it still did not run it! At this point I gave up.

What do you mean by "it"? What result were you expecting?

> PS: The document page says that the last update was on Oct, 10 2002,
> which is rather confusing.
>
> PPS: bjam -v reports version 3.1.4 and bjam --version reports bjam
> version of 03.01.03

-v gets you the Perforce Jam version and --version gets you the
Boost.Jam version. Confusing, I know.

Thanks for testing this!

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com