Re: [Boost-build] PCH support

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-13 05:00:50

On Sunday 12 March 2006 01:48, Alex Besogonov wrote:
> Good <time-of-day>!
>
> Despite all Reece Dunn's hard work with PCH support there are still some
> problems:
> 1. No PCH for GCC (and unofficial patch for gcc.jam v1.57 doesn't apply
> cleanly any more). We need at least some 'dummy' PCH support (something
> like in rc.jam for FreeBSD/Linux).

I agree. I have 4.0/4.1 handy, but no enough time. Maybe somebody can 
volunteer?

> 2. Properties are not propagated from PCH files, so workarounds have to
> be used. For example:
...
> # PCH file
> pch precompiled : [ cast _ pcheader : coverage-prec.hpp ]
> 		coverage-prec.cpp
>
> 		<define>BOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1
> 		<define>BOOST_FILESYSTEM_DYN_LINK=1
> 		<define>BOOST_SERIALIZATION_DYN_LINK=1
...
> # Main application executable
> exe scanner-tool
>
> 		precompiled
> 		file-scanner.cpp
> 		gcov-processor.cpp
> 		coverage-lib
> 		boost-libs-used
...

> Without <define>s in precompiled header options autolink will kick and
> cause all sorts of problems. If I include 'boost-libs-used' target in
> 'precompiled' then Boost libraries are not found during 'scanner-tool'
> linkage.

How do you suggest to fix this? It seems more like a problem with Boost 
autolinking, then with PCH support.

>
> PS: here are some small patches to verbatim.jam and inline-file.py
> The patch to inline-file.py fixes superfluous '\n' at the end of
> 'verbatimized' file and the patch to verbatim.jam adds support for
> additional lookup of 'inline-file.py' script.

Does it fail for you? It works fine on my end.

- Volodya