On Sunday 12 March 2006 01:48, Alex Besogonov wrote:
> Good <time-of-day>!
>
> Despite all Reece Dunn's hard work with PCH support
there are still some
> problems:
> 1. No PCH for GCC (and unofficial patch for gcc.jam
v1.57 doesn't apply
> cleanly any more). We need at least some 'dummy' PCH
support (something
> like in rc.jam for FreeBSD/Linux).
I agree. I have 4.0/4.1 handy, but no enough time. Maybe
somebody can
volunteer?
> 2. Properties are not propagated from PCH files, so
workarounds have to
> be used. For example:
...
> # PCH file
> pch precompiled : [ cast _ pcheader : coverage-prec.hpp
]
> coverage-prec.cpp
>
> <define>BOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1
> <define>BOOST_FILESYSTEM_DYN_LINK=1
> <define>BOOST_SERIALIZATION_DYN_LINK=1
...
> # Main application executable
> exe scanner-tool
>
> precompiled
> file-scanner.cpp
> gcov-processor.cpp
> coverage-lib
> boost-libs-used
...
> Without <define>s in precompiled header options
autolink will kick and
> cause all sorts of problems. If I include
'boost-libs-used' target in
> 'precompiled' then Boost libraries are not found
during 'scanner-tool'
> linkage.
How do you suggest to fix this? It seems more like a problem
with Boost
autolinking, then with PCH support.
>
> PS: here are some small patches to verbatim.jam and
inline-file.py
> The patch to inline-file.py fixes superfluous '\n'
at the end of
> 'verbatimized' file and the patch to verbatim.jam
adds support for
> additional lookup of 'inline-file.py' script.
Does it fail for you? It works fine on my end.
- Volodya
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-build
|