From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-17 20:33:26
Rene Rivera wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Rene Rivera <grafikrobot <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Hmm, I start to think what you did could be done simpler. You can modify gcc
>> linking generators, so that for runtime-link=static it returns nothing. Then,
>> you can modify typed-targets so that when generators return nothing, warning
>> is emitted instead of error (probably, just for Boost). Then, you won't need
>> new generators method, as well as some of the changes you made.
>> This approach would simplify the code; though I still don't agree with target
>> skipping approach.
> Hm, I wonder if an easier solution is to have the gcc toolset add a
> "<build>no" to the properties. Is that possible? It would seem to solve
> all the problems of skipping targets and dependents.
Pinging since I never got a response on this one.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo
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