Subject: Re: [Boost-build] gcc 3.3.6 and -Winvalid-pch
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-02 22:17:29
On 5/2/2010 2:59 PM, Wesley Johnson wrote:
> I would think that Boost/Jam would be detecting the compiler version and
> reacting appropriately. Is that not exactly why something this complicated
> was invented.
> Is there an error in Boost/Jam compile applying -Winvalid-pch to a gcc
> 3.3.6 compiler. ???
> I would think that Jam would detect gcc 3.3.6 and not apply a switch that is
> known to not work.
> If it is an error by Boost, how do I go about coping with it ???
> Where do I fix errors like this ???
> Is the end user expected to find switches like pch=off and apply them
> according to their platform and compiler. I thought that is what Jam
> was supposed to do.
Ah.. I can understand being a bit perplexed.. But in everything that is
complicated there are bugs. So yes, it's a bug if we use an option that
is not available in the version of the toolset.
> There might be other switches like pch that I need to use. Where are they
> documented ???
Unfortunately there can be an unbounded set of options since each
toolset is different and hence a good portion of them are not documented
except in the source file for each toolset. For example I added a new
one just for the daarwin/xcode toolset a few days ago. But a good
portion of them are documented in the BB docs in
Unfortunately "pch" is not among the ones in that documentation :-( And
hence it's also a bug it's not documented.
> I do know the age of this compiler, etc., etc.. This machine is used for
> research and there are reasons why it is not
> updated to every new release.
> Unless the C++ language has changed significantly this compiler should still
> be able to
> count the number of initializers in an array.
> Is there a new C++ language standard to which Boost is written. ???
That is strictly a question for the dev or user list. But briefly, Boost
is written to what the compiler vendors support through the support of
testers and maintainers that provide expertise for specific versions of
those tools. Hence, we can only support compilers that are tested.
> I am not sure what I should do at this point except start writing Makefiles,
> and start rewriting the failing libraries.
> Thank You for any help.
One thing we tend to always ask when posting to the build list is that
people provide the output of running: bjam --debug-configuration (rest
of the args).. So that we can tell what BB thinks you are configuring.
If you could post that, and related version information, we could try to
diagnose what problems you may be having.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
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