On Dec 11, 2006, at 8:06 AM, David Abrahams wrote:

I know you understand this Rene, but to be completely clear for
everyone else: I mean that we should have one top-level "gcc" toolset
that everyone uses even if they're targeting Darwin.

Hey Dave -- I worked at Dragon Systems while you and Tim Peters were there -- sorry if this has already been answered, but why the insistence that gcc.jam and darwin.jam merge? I thought the whole point of the tool inheritance framework was to allow for this kind of derivation? I'm happily using BBv2 on a PowerBook and I would hate to encounter a ton of churn to back get to where I am today. Seems kind of unusual to me to include a ton of Darwin/MacOS X-specific rules and actions to support bundles and frameworks in gcc.jam.



Brad Howes
Group 42
MIT Lincoln Laboratory 244 Wood St. Lexington, MA 02173
Phone: 781.981.5292 Fax: 781.981.3495 Secretary: 781.981.7420