Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Jürgen Hunold (hunold+lists.Boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-02 04:05:29

Hash: SHA1

Hi Volodya !

On Monday 02 February 2004 08:27, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Hi Jürgen,

> Whoops! It's very good that you have such bad tests, otherwise we'd
> have performance troubles when it's not so easy to diagnose what's
> up.

Yes, my projects are always good for surprises ;-))

> > Question: How can I disable library ordering ?
> To to gcc.jam and
> 1. Comment out the entire body of set-library-order (it's defined at
> the end). 2. Make 'order-libraries' return 'libraries' argument.
> If that does not help, I'd like to take a look at the profile.

Ok, everything works as fast as before.
Shall I run some profiling ?

Is is possible to make library-ordering a customizable feature ?
Like <hardcode-dll-paths> maybe ?
I think that my "real life", "legacy rich" projects are immune to any
improvement of library ordering. For some relative new projects (with
better design ;-) ) library ordering could be an improvement.
Please note that for dynamic linking on Linux, no library ordering is
needed (at least, I never needed to sort libraries using handwritten
Makefiles and qmake generated ones). You only need to order libraries
when doing static linking. But for this to work, we need the
"order-sensitive" properties for system libraries, because these must
be ordered, too. And you have to order these libraries manually,
because they are usually not generated by bjam ;-)
Right now, I've applied the "-W,"-(" " patch in order to circumnavigate
these problems


- --
* Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold ! Institut für Verkehrswesen, Eisenbahnbau
* voice: ++49 511 762-2529 ! und -betrieb, Universität Hannover
* fax : ++49 511 762-3001 ! Appelstrasse 9a, D-30167 Hannover
* hunold_at_[hidden] !
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)



Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at