Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-03 00:56:13

David Abrahams wrote:

> on Sun Dec 02 2007, Jurko Gospodnetić <>
> wrote:
>> Hi all.
>>> I had just got a totally crazy idea -- we have some algorithms
>>> to compute target paths, and --abbreviate-paths options, and it
>>> not quite good yet.
>> I have another suggestion... (written directly as I am thinking of it
>> in my head so do not scream too loudly if it does not make sense... :-)
>> )...
>> Allow a project to specify that some existing feature is always 'xxx'
>> and should not be represented using a feature specific folder no matter
>> how the feature itself is defined.
>> That would mean that if a project needs to be built using different
>> values for a single feature then that feature should get its own
>> specific build folder, but if it does not then it should not.
>> As a note - this would require that the build system prevent such
>> project level settings from being violated.
> Or you could just not represent the feature when it has its default
> value, just as feature relevance worked in BBv1.

You surely meant something else, as a feature that has its default value
is *not* represented now. And "feature relevance" as I understand it
is something else.

- Volodya

Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at