From: Daniel Heck (dheck_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-04 05:18:10
>>So from your point of view, and obviously others, it would be good
>>to have a "bjam [options..] configure" that would create a default
>>set of options for you.
> That's sort of what user-config.jam and site-config.jam are. I'm not
> sure that passing options to bjam just so it can write them into such
> a file is superior to editing the file directly.
... or using autoconf to generate the appropriate configuration files
for boost-build / bjam / Jam automagically, for that matter. That's one
approach I once used with great success. It nicely combines the
advantages of all those tools in one solution and gets rid of Automake...
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