Re: [Boost-users] problem with boost compilation

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] problem with boost compilation
From: Nat Linden (nat_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-01 09:44:24

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Lars Viklund <zao_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 08:06:30AM -0400, Nat Linden wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Martin Elzen <martinelzen_at_[hidden]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > There may be other errors, but what jumps out at me right now is that
> > > the "address-model=" part does NOT require two minus-signs in front of it...

> > What would be the drawback to supporting all such switches in both
> > syntaxes? (address-model= or --address-model=)

> The set of options are rather fixed and domain-unspecific.
> The set of features isn't and are up to the particular things you're
> trying to build.
>
> Users should take care in understanding the command line tool they use,
> and stop assuming that it behaves according to some particular GNU-like
> environment they are familiar with.

As is also frequently pointed out in this venue, Boost.Build != bjam.
I acknowledge that bjam is intended to solve a broader variety of
problems than building Boost. What I'm suggesting is that one must
know a tremendous amount about the underlying tool (bjam) in order to
successfully use the wrapper tool (Boost.Build).

Boost.Build has a much more focused mandate. It does have a set of
"particular things you're trying to build." It could, admittedly at
the cost of some effort, do a better job wrapping some of the
peculiarities of bjam.

But I'll drop this because I'd forgotten that CMake is going to make
all the above moot.