Re: Some comments on Boost.Jam and Boost.Build

From: jurko_jamboost (jurko_jamboost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-03 09:40:28

 Hi Rene.

--- In jamboost_at_[hidden], Rene Rivera <grafik666_at_r...> wrote:

> For the first one I've put in some changes to options/help.jam
> to fix it. I also did some cleanup to reduce the number of bogus
> discovered modules. So Jurko if you could try this out that would
> be wonderfull :-)

Hmm, how do I try this out? Where do I get it from? I thought I
could get it from the boost CVS server but the options/help.jam file
there was last modified there more than two months ago. At first I
thought it was a problem with viewCVS using a non-up-to-date backup
CVS server so I waiter for a day but still nothing changed. Could you
please tell me where I can find the current development version of
Boost.Build including your changes to options/help.jam? I'd love to
try them out.

> For the second, the problem is a bit harder to fix... What the
> do-scan rule does is it adds module.scan targets to the all fake
> target, of which only the last one has the print(ECHO) "action"
> (not a real Jam action, just a rule which does the ECHOs). So if
> the targets for the "all" are not done in the added order it could
> cause the strange behaviour. -- I really don't know if this is the
> case though. Fixing it would involve some kind of chaining on the
> targets :-(

Is there a way to schedule an action after all of the header scans
have finished or is it really necessary to handcraft some kind of
chaining manually?

Best regards,
Jurko