Re: [jamboost] Re: Some comments on Boost.Jam and Boost.Build

From: Rene Rivera (grafik666_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-03 10:16:40

[2003-09-03] jurko_jamboost wrote:

> 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.

Hmm, SF seems to be really slow, I checked and the new version is up there,
just not for anoncvs. The boost-consulting mirror has the newest (thanks to
Dave):

http://boost-consulting.com/boost/tools/build/options/help.jam

More info about the mirrors at:

http://boost.sourceforge.net/1.30.2/more/download.html

[giving you yet another mirror, because the main site web server is having
virus issues]

>> 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?

Not in this case. The issue with the doc scanning is that for the console
output mode everything happens in the header scanning stage. In order to put
an action after that would be to have a real target.

-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera (at) acm.org - grafik (at) redshift-software.com
-- 102708583 (at) icq