Re: [Boost-users] bjam in 1.44 vs 1.39

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] 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
patches.

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
> failure:
>
> ...failed gcc.compile.c++ /home/foo/Foo.o... ...failed updating 1 target...
>
> machine:/home/foo # echo $?
> 0
>
> 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.
>
>
>