Re: [jamboost] Re: Why do no targets depend on the Jamfiles?

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-06 10:24:58

On Tuesday 05 April 2005 18:26, David Abrahams wrote:

> > I believe it was me. And I still consider it to be a major problem but I
> > was alone and I did not manage to convice anybody about it
> > seriousness.
>
> I've been convinced of it for years.

Oh, well.

> > Well, I agree that it is not a good idea to rebuild everything on
> > every Jamfile change. IMHO the built files should depend on the
> > commands used to build them...
>
> Right. We should write the contents of the commands out to some files
> as part of the build process and then make inequality a precondition
> of outdating new targets. 

Should not be very hard.

> Or we could wait for the Python integration 
> to be finished and let Scons' mechanisms take care of it...

And this might be hard. Not only we need to finish Python port, but also 
integrate SCons.

>
> ...which we can't do until BBv1 is retired. How's that project coming
> along, Volodya?

I have run all Boost tests (including Python) with V1 and V2 and compared the 
results. Except for some noise (like random numbers used by some tests), they 
are equal.

What remains is:
- tweak process_jam_log so that it handles V2 style grists (affects parsing of 
"skipped" messages)
- make Python work on Windows. I'd appreciate help with implemeting or testing 
this.

-- 
Vladimir Prus
http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com
Boost.Build V2: http://boost.org/boost-build2