From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-20 03:37:13
On Friday 18 April 2008 12:32:09 Roland Schwarz wrote:
> Mat Marcus wrote:
> > Why is the better than Rene's suggestion to put:
> > toolset.add-requirements
> > <toolset>gcc-4.2.0:<target-os>cygwin
> > <toolset>gcc-4.2.0:<threadapi>pthread ;
> > into user-config.jam?
> It is not better, it is different. It reflects your expectation, that
> despite you are building from cmd, you expect the resulting exe
> linked against cygwindll.
> >> I still do not recommend to use msvc compiled bjam from bash.
> > Bash is my shell. It is essential to my workflows. In fact, I find
> > windows unusable without it :-). Msvc is one of the compilers that I
> > must support. I must also ensure that users of my libraries can build
> > from the CMD shell.
> Perhaps you misunderstood me? I ma in no way against using bash! (I like
> it too :-) WHat I said is just: If on bash, use bjam compiled for cygwin.
Honestly, this all "compiled for cygwin vs. compiled for windows" thing is
a bit messy. I wonder if we can get rid of it. Cygwin binaries can access
both cygwin and windows paths. Windows binaries can access only windows
paths. So this means that a win build of bjam should, in theory, work,
as long as you use only Windows paths in user-config.jam and your Jamfiles.
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