|
Boost-Build : |
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-19 04:14:51
Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Tuesday 19 September 2006 00:09, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> >> Why not that, too?
>> >
>> > Because I did not see obvious use case for that. And <threading>multi is
>> > non-free so it can be passed via usage requirements anyway at the moment.
>>
>> ?? If it is non-free and can be passed via usage requirements, this
>> exact capability would be useful.
>
> Sorry, "can" should be "can't". Non-free features can't be passed via usage
> requirements.
Why not?
>> >> And what's a "parent?" do you mean a project higher up in the hierarchy?
>> >
>> > For a target -- project where the target is defined. For a project --
>> > project higher up.
>>
>> I can see why it's slightly less dangerous to limit the feature in
>> that way, but I'm not sure it's worth the cost. We've long discussed
>> the desire to say "despite usage requirements, I know better; this
>> target doesn't have such-and-such requirement."
>
> I just don't remember such discussions. If you can point me on them,
No time to dig, sorry.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
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