Re: Boost.jam and 32 vs. 64 bit compilations

Anthony:  I've been able to do this sort of conditional on searched-
lib targets.

A related question for the list in general:  Why isn't the address  
model part of the name of the libraries compiled from Boost?  If it  
were, the conditional <library> feature would not be necessary.


On Jun 15, 2009, at 6:29 PM, Anthony Foglia wrote:

        We primarily compile in 64 bit, but sometimes need 32 bit  
compilations.  We used to have custom-made rules for the boost  
libraries, but I'm working on switching to using the boost.jam  
distributed in contrib.

        Is there a way to configure the rules in there so the library search  
path correctly finds either the 32- or 64-bit libraries as needed.

        I tried lines like :

using boost
   : 1.38
   : <include>boost_1_38_0/include/boost-1_38
     <address-model>64:<library>boost_1_38_0/lib
     <address-model>32:<library>boost_1_38_0/lib32
   ;

But the conditional parameter logic confuses boost.jam into thinking  
boost isn't configured.

        I tried looking at the functions in property and property-set, but  
couldn't find anything to evaluate the rules to collapse the library  
property to just one.  I'm guessing it's not even possible, because  
the address-model feature prints as "16 32 64" even though I'm  
explicitly passing in on the command-line.

        Is there some other simple way to add this ability?


--
Anthony Foglia
Princeton Consultants
(609) 987-8787 x233

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