Re: [Boost-build] Did anyone try building Boost for Windows Mobilewithout STLPort?

Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Did anyone try building Boost for Windows Mobilewithout STLPort?
From: Max Motovilov (max_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-10 12:58:18

> I'd be interested in those extensions. Are they available publicly?

Not at the moment, because in the rush to deadline [(TM):)] I did not 
attempt a clean separation of pure extension code from the proprietary 
code that properly belongs to my client. I really ought to, but it'll 
have to wait until the deadlines are met.

I understand that David Deakins @ VeecoFTC is pursuing similar goals as 
well. He even pointed me to his proposed extensions to STLPort but [I am 
ashamed to say that] I still did not review those to see how much 
overlap they have with what I've been developing. Maybe David will 
respond to this thread.

At any rate, I am suddenly faced with a few problems within STLPort 
itself (failures to properly clean up its global data structures when a 
DLL is unloaded) that really suggest trying a pure MS STL build.

> I'm currently in the process of setting up Boost + StlPort for WinCe myself. 
> So, I'd be interested what problems you've run into.

Heh. The extreme complexity of the Boost.Build system, first of all :) 
Without David's configuration files I'd be floundering for much longer.

After that, there were a few conspicuous POSIX APIs missing that were 
easy to either stub or replace using the wcelibcex functionality (for 
some reason, the latter mostly provides renamed POSIX APIs so an extra 
layer of headers is required for forwarding). That took care of the 
header-only libs that I use and of the regex. I also needed filesystem 
and there I had to implement a number of Win32 APIs missing from CE as 
well as remap some of the returned errors (now probably unnecessary with 
trunk code as Beman Dawes recently accepted my patches) and in some 
instances, add char* versions for the existing wchar_t* APIs.

> FWIW, I've tried and failed. The main problem lies in the fact that a few 
> standard headers (e.g. <locale>) are simply not available in the MS std lib 
> that comes for CE. Many of the Boost libs fail to build because they include 
> one of those headers. I haven't even attempted to use any of the header-only 
> libraries.

That's true about <locale> -- but I have not yet investigated which of 
the dependencies could be either rid of by configuration settings or 
stubbed out. Was hoping that someone did :)

Regards,
...Max...