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.
> > 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
> ...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
What remains is:
- tweak process_jam_log so that it handles V2 style grists (affects parsing of
- make Python work on Windows. I'd appreciate help with implemeting or testing
-- Vladimir Prus http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com Boost.Build V2: http://boost.org/boost-build2
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