From: Brian Ravnsgaard Riis (brian_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-26 18:56:09
Ok.. I'm resurrecting this thread again. The problem persists.
David Abrahams wrote:
> Brian Ravnsgaard Riis <brian_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>I've been having trouble using mingw with BBv2 for some time, due to a
>>failure to invoke action gcc.archive. I got our old friend "spawn: No
>>such file or directory", which tells next to nothing about what really
>>Investigation showed that since gcc.archive is a two-line action (remove
>>then archive) it choked on that somehow. Commenting out either or both
>>lines made no difference, i.e. still no successful run. *Deleting* one
>>of the lines, however, solved the problem, except, of course, that both
>>lines are there for a reason. The problem turned out to be located
>>In the top of gcc.jam a little trick is present to circumvent trouble
>>with command line length on NT. It sets the JAMSHELL variable to '%'.
>>This was why it choked.
> It shouldn't have. '%' is only supposed to take effect for
> single-line commands.
Yes, so it says in the comments. I'm just reporting my experiences,
which are: Changing that line (or commenting it out), removes the
>>I have replaced this with
>> "JAMSHELL = cmd.exe /C %"
>>Now everything works.
> That will break when you run up against the command-line length
> limitation. You may as well leave off setting JAMSHELL altogether in
> that case, because it amounts to roughly the same thing.
I realize that now. I've not yet run against above-mentioned limitation,
but I really fear that it may happen.
This really leaves me back where I started. I've tested with Cygwin as
well as mingw, and in both cases BBv2 chokes on gcc.archive, if I leave
the above line unchanged.
-- /Brian Riis
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