From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-07-15 12:00:03
On 7/15/19 5:07 AM, Edward Diener via Boost-build wrote:
> There is an end-user undocumented option for intel-win toolsets called
> <rewrite-setup-scripts>, which mimics the same end-user undocumented
> option for the msvc toolset. The effect of this is in code in intel-win:
That's a problem with the docs.
>> A general fix would be to add all the subfeatures of
>> the current toolset instead of hard-coding the msvc
>> version on the line that I pointed out.
> I am not sure how to do this but maybe you or someone else can take a
> crack at it.
Please create a github issue for this.
>>> Did anybody even realize that the current change to provide our own
>>> setup scripts, combined with the single msvc-setup.bat location for the
>>> intel-win toolset, destroys the ability for end-users to use more than a
>>> single Intel C++ for Window implementation/vc++ compatibility with Boost
>>> Build as it currently exists ?
>> I certainly wasn't aware that intel-win uses a single
>> location until you brought this up.Â I'm pretty sure that
>> I'm the one who broke this, when I moved the setup
>> scripts from %TEMP% to the build directory, so I doubt
>> anyone else noticed, either.
> Wouldn't it still have used a single location under %TEMP% ?
The file names were mangled differently before that change.
The toolset version used to be mangled into a single file name,
without any subdirectories.
> The issue
> seems to be the code you pointed out where intel-win produces a single
> location somehow for msvc-setup.bat rather than the sort of multiple
> locations which having the toolset be msvc-someversion produces for each
> vc++ version.
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