From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-23 09:47:59
Hugo Duncan wrote:
> > I.e. without "bin" and main target name. Well, "bin" is just a way
> to store
> > all built products under one directory.
> Sorry, I meant keeping the bin and the main target name but
> without the rest. ie replacing 1234567/... in Dave's example
> with "release". This is probably ok for executables, but somewhat
> resrictive for libraries. Anyway, I was really just trying to
> suggest some scheme to avoid having to wade through directories
> with cryptic names.
Yea, I get your idea. Possibly the user can provide short names for
combination he uses.
> > > I can see that might cause problems if you change the definition
> > > of the options used in a specific build.
> > Hmm... interesting question. The main target name is used to handle
> > situation when a target has some property which can't be represented
> > in path, e.g. free property. But this is only a problem is target
> can be built
> > twice with different values of that free property. And if a target
> is used
> > only by one main target, it's always built with the same properties.
> > Maybe, the main target name can be just removed from target path?
> I guess you could write the options used to a file (or a hash number
> generated from the options) and then compare the file's contents with
> the options for the current build.
That's possible and I believe that's what SCons does. But I have not idea how
hard it will be to implement.
OTOH, I really think that main target name can be eliminated, and will post a
separate message on this.
> As I understand it the long directory names are there to:
> i) to maintain consistency of binary objects.
> ii) be able to keep seperate objects for seperate builds.
> At the moment the directory namimg is driven by the first of these,
> which is usually overkill for the second aim.
> ie I usually build a release, debug and profile version of an
> executable. to solve i) and ii) I need three directories. At the
> moment I get a deeply nested directory structure to define these
> three directories.
Yea, I understand, but don't have a solution yet.
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