Re: [Boost-build] single threaded build with msvc-7.1?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-02 17:33:03

on Fri Nov 02 2007, Deane Yang <deane_yang-AT-yahoo.com> wrote:

> Can we try to be more specific?
>
> If you run bjam without explicit settings, then it should indeed try to 
> figure out what the most reasonable thing to do is. 

It should do that even if you do give explicit instructions
(http://zigzag.cs.msu.su/boost.build/wiki/AlternativeSelection).  The
problem is that the semantics chosen by Volodya do not match common
use cases, or my intuition
(http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c1wilhkqa.fsf%40grogan.peloton%3e)

> But I would love it if bjam could report what it is choosing, so I
> can see if I am getting something I don't want. 

So use -d+2 to see the commands being issued. Many people really
*don't* want to see a bunch of gibberish on the screen that they don't
understand... we have to serve too wide a community.

> It is not uncommon for me to accidentally compile different
> libraries with slightly different settings and run into real
> difficulties when I try to use them together in one project.
>
> If you run bjam with explicit settings, for example what Robert 
> originally tried:
>
> --toolset=msvc-7.1 threading=single variant=debug,release
>
> and bjam decides that it is impossible to deliver exactly what is 
> requested (in this case, single threading with shared runtime), then is 
> it not unreasonable for bjam to simply quit with a message saying "what 
> you requested is not possible", along with a suggestion on what might work?

That would be great.  It's especially inconsistent today that the
argument against
http://zigzag.cs.msu.su/boost.build/wiki/AlternativeSelection amounts
to "using existing semantic to force intentions on user is not right."

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com