From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-04 03:50:49
> > I think that propagaration is still the simplest solution, though
> it's a
> > question if it's right or not. But it's a question for you, and
> other users.
> I don't think I understand the system well enough to say that this
> solution is more correct. It 'feels' better off-hand.
Understood. In fact, the difference between the two solutions is that if
you make <user-interface> relevant to exe but not to any other target, and you
make <optimization> relevant to everything but bison and flex, you get your
targets placed in many different directories.
When you keep the current scheme, all targets for a single property
combination most likely will be placed in one directory. That's what Jurgen
> > What's you're asking is
> > http://zigzag.cs.msu.su:7814/scarab/issues/id/BB19
> I can't get to this issue. Could you forward me the issue as text?
(though with a horrible formatting). Jurgen's post is
> > I'd be happy to accept any resolution. If you belive this feature
> is needed
> > and is willing to invest some time in it, both in design and
> > you're welcome!
> I will read the exchange between you and Jurgen and start looking at
> the code. Is it all in 'C'? That would certainly dampen my
> enthusiasm about contributing. Am I missing something?
No, it's not at 'C', at least now ;-) In fact, we need to first decide on
logic used to decide/specify that a feature is relevant to a target.
> Also, I have made the change to builtin.jam and verified that it
> works as expected. How do I submit the fix?
Take a look at 'hacking.txt'.
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