SunPro and sysinclude?

David Abrahams <daveboost-consulting.com> writes:

> Vladimir Prus <ghostcs.msu.su> writes:
>
>> Sorry, can you clarify? Are paths for
"" and <> includes complately separate, 
>> wtih <include> specifying ""
paths and <sysinclude> specifying <> paths? Or 
>> what?
>
> That's up to the compiler's capabilities, of course. 
There's no
> standard for it.  IIRC, Metrowerks gives you 100%
precise control over
> which paths are searched for each kind of #include. 
GCC does not (you
> can read about its options yourself).
>
>>From a BBv1 user's perspective, <sysinclude>
is for paths in which you
> want to be sure an #include<...> will be found,
and <include> is for
> paths in which you want to be sure an
#include"..." will be found.
>
>>> Some compilers make a distinction between
"" and <>.  CodeWarrior
>>> is one of them.  If Sun does the same I believe
this explains all
>>> of the Boost.Python failures with SunPro.
>>
>> In V1's sunpro-tool.jam, both <include> and
<sysinclude> are mapped to -I.
>
> Yes, but we never had Boost.Python (or much of Boost at
all) working
> with Sun before.  They've improved the compiler a lot
and the error
> messages correspond to that kind of problem.

So do we have <sysinclude> capability in v2 yet, and
is somebody going
to apply it to the SunPro toolset?  I'm getting tired of
seeing
everything failing for Python with Sun-5.8 when it's quite
possible it
all could work!

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-build