Subject: Re: [Boost-build] bjam in 1.44 vs 1.39
From: Jonathan Brannan (kickace_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-03 22:53:51
Nevermind, I guess I did not search hard enough and found the correct
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Jonathan Brannan <kickace_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> We recently switched from boost 1.39 to boost 1.44. We use the bjam and
> boost build packaged with the version of boost we use.
> It seems that the bjam packaged with 1.44 exists with 0 even if there is a
> ...failed gcc.compile.c++ /home/foo/Foo.o... ...failed updating 1 target...
> machine:/home/foo # echo $?
> It stops early with the -q and prints out that it failed, it just exits 0.
> bjam -v Boost.Jam Version 3.1.18. OS=LINUX. Copyright 1993-2002 Christopher
> Seiwald and Perforce Software, Inc. Copyright 2001 David Turner. Copyright
> 2001-2004 David Abrahams. Copyright 2002-2008 Rene Rivera. Copyright
> 2003-2008 Vladimir Prus.
> With Version 3.1.17. OS=LINUX version that came with 1.39, I get an exit
> status of 1, which is what I expect.
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