Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Liam Routt (caligari_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-28 00:37:50

Liam Routt wrote:
> I'm tossing up whether to 1) patch the jambase.c file and compile our
> own derivative of boost-jam for this project, or 2) use -f ourbase.jam.
> The first option seems like overkill, but the second option requires a
> command line argument for each use of jam, which bites.

I have opted to patch bjam with the following:

--- builtins.c 2005-07-13 14:26:01.000000000 +1000
+++ 2005-09-27 10:01:30.000000000 +1000
@@ -320,7 +320,7 @@

char * args[] = { "command", 0 };
- bind_builtin( "SHELL",
+ bind_builtin( "COMMAND",
builtin_shell, 0, args );

Respectfully, I would urge the team to consider this patch themselves.
It seem decidely odd to add a builtin command (with useful
functionality) that is hidden by pre-existing rules. And even if you
remove the compatibility rule you are still left with a piece of new
fucntionality sharing the same "word" with an existing default rule
(Shell), which can only lead to confusion. By using a different word
altogether you avoid all of those problems.

Obviously you are not using the default Jambase with BB, so this is not
an issue for your primary development, but it would be of use to those
who are leveraging off of your basic jam advances.

As a followup question, I've noticed that the returned list has a
newline and a character (usually M or L?) appended to it. Is there a
particular reason for this (perhaps returning the status?)? Stripping it
off is not impossible (would be easier if MATCH recognised \n), but it
feels like an oversight in some way).

Take care,


Liam Routt Ph: (03) 8344-1315
Research Programmer caligari_at_[hidden]
Computer Science, Melbourne University (or liam_at_[hidden])

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