On 4/4/2015 1:57 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Hi,
for some time on develop, top-level Jamroot used to deduce address-model and architecture from compiler.
Could we get some indication in the Boost Build docs what 'architecture' values are possible ? The only thing I see there is: "architecture The architecture features specifies the general processor familty to generate code for." Did I miss something ?
The only issue was that both properties would be added to targets paths when not necessary. Fix for that has been just committed, for develop:
https://github.com/boostorg/boost/commit/945e3c0bbdd31ce8c297e0aff5340f0adb1...
and I performed these operations on master:
- Merged all of Boost.Build changes:
https://github.com/boostorg/build/commit/2e764707e03d25b6928501c25a717e195c0...
- Cherry-picked one Boost.Context change:
https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/9b392c68b59021aa4801dcb245bc64ad5...
- Cherry-picked one Boost.Log change:
https://github.com/boostorg/log/commit/27a822a6b82f8bf34cbc681ac6583412bdf27...
- Cherry-picked two root project changes and updated pointers to Context and Log:
https://github.com/boostorg/boost/commit/e3bc35f7891e72ad74e57dc216db899d162...
https://github.com/boostorg/boost/commit/beb53b6b9574f95309384bfc5afffb40d46...
https://github.com/boostorg/boost/commit/b69a072401695c9978085158af4c1ea84ce...
With that, "./b2 -n" in up-to-date checkout of superproject works fine on Linux. Also, "./b2 -n --with-context --with-system" works fine, no address-model elements in path. Putting explicit address-model=64 does not change path. Putting explicit address-model=32 does add this element to path, as expected.
Note that:
- I did not merge any other Boost.Context or Boost.Log changes. - Nothing was required for Boost.Config, since it was merged earlier.
I'd appreciate if people test current state of master branch, and report any concerns.