Re: [Boost-build] naive usage of bootstrap.sh

Subject: Re: [Boost-build] naive usage of bootstrap.sh
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir.prus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-24 10:56:55

On 24-Oct-16 5:40 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> On 23.10.2016 15:55, Robert Ramey wrote:
>
> [...]
>> Which looks quite wrong to me.  I expect bootstrap.sh to build some
>> boost tools not include things like --show-libraries , without-icu
>> etc. I'm now totally confused as to what bootstrap.sh is supposed to do.
>
> I entirely agree. I originally was very confused as it wasn't clear what
> that script's job was, but eventually I just got used to it and started
> ignoring it.
> However, I still think this is wrong, and I entirely agree with Robert
> that "bootstrap.sh" should do nothing but prepare the build tool itself,
> so all the build-specific parameters should then be added to the
> invocation of 'bjam' (or 'b2' or whatever the name of the day is).

The current behaviour is not quite arbitrary either - it was originally
made to help people who like to pass some values to configure script, 
and make those values stick. It may be easier to skip that and just
instruct to read project-config.jam and modify to taste, but I'm sure
others will complain just as loudly :-(

> Perhaps relatedly: I noticed on my laptop that `bjam` (as installed from
> system package "boost-build") would ignore the 'BOOST_BUILD_PATH'
> variable. Perhaps 'bootstrap.sh' causes the bjam / b2 executable to have
> certain values hard-coded / compiled in, and that such command-line
> options as '--prefix' will thus affect which values that are ?
> That ought to be documented, at the very least !

No, bootstrap.sh does not hardcode any values; it only sets up 
project-config.jam. If you system boost-build package does not work, 
it's veyr likely because it's some very old version.

-- 
Vladimir Prus
https://vladimirprus.com