From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-22 18:46:31
Jurko GospodnetiÄ wrote:
> Hmmm, I never thought about this much but never found it to be wrong
> that an incorrect tool configuration causes the build to fail.
> For instance, why should not a tool configuration fail in case it is
> called multiple times with conflicting configuration options? In that
> case the configuration can never be correct under any circumstances.
> One such example would be configuring the same version of a compiler
> toolset each time with a different executable.
> As initializing a toolset is a site level configuration option, I do
> not see how the rationale given for this rule on the cited web page
> applies: 'Configuration may be shared between different machines, and
> wrong values on one machine can be OK on another.'.
> We do not initialize toolsets on different machines using the same
> file. And even if we were to use such a 'shared' configuration file it
> would be cleaner to add code to it that detects which machine it is on
> and adjust the initialization accordingly.
> I'd be most interested in hearing other people's opinions on this.
I compile using a windows bjam for both windows and cygwin.
My user-config.jam contains this:
using gcc : 3.4.4 : g++ ;
using gcc : 4.2.3 : g++-4.2.3 ;
using gcc : 4.3.0 : g++-4.3.0 ;
If I am not running from the cygwin shell, these are not in my PATH,
so initialization fails. However, since the gcc toolset only issues a
I can still build with msvc.
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