From: Johan Nilsson (r.johan.nilsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-30 03:21:20
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Sun Oct 28 2007, Daniel Wallin <daniel-AT-boost-consulting.com>
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> on Sat Oct 27 2007, Vladimir Prus <ghost-AT-cs.msu.su> wrote:
>>>> BTW, that email mentions SCons -- does it go via something else but
>>> IIRC, yes, but I'm not sure. If you care you might look at the
>>> results of googling 'scons windows long command line'.
>>>> and by bjam can go the same route?
>>> Sure, if you want to, but then you have to give up access to shell
>>> commands in actions. The point of mentioning Scons might have been
>>> to say that as much as possible, we should contrive to make things
>>> like this somebody else's problem.
>> This has nothing to do with "cmd" though, does it?
> Well, I wouldn't say /that/.
>> Long command lines and long paths are different things.
> yes, but the former can be caused by the latter.
>> Not using "cmd" wouldn't help with windows 260 char path limit,
>> which seems like an unsolvable problem (short of reducing the
>> features in the path, that is), or am I missing something?
> That's true.
There's always the \\?\C:\my\very\long\path workaround where the full path
can supposedly be 32k+ characters long, with each element being MAX_PATH
characters. However, this syntax requires absolute paths and doesn't accept
forward slashes, IIRC.
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