Re: Including bjam code based on the address_model

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 7:58 PM Edward Diener via Boost-build <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On 7/9/2019 11:30 AM, Edward Diener via Boost-build wrote:
> > On 7/9/2019 8:47 AM, Edward Diener via Boost-build wrote:
> >> I would like to include different bjam code, using the 'include' rule,
> >> into a jamfile based on the address-model used when b2 is invoked. Is
> >> this doable, and if so how ? Would it make any difference if the
> >> jamfile involved were 'user-config.jam' ?
> >>
> >> Essentially I need to use different toolset definitions depending on
> >> whether the compile is for 32 bit or 64-bit code and I thought the
> >> easiest way to do this would be just to include different toolset
> >> definitions into my user-config.jam depending on the address model. If
> >> there is a better way to do this within bjam I would love to know what
> >> it is. Most of the toolsets involved are compilers but some are just
> >> other tools such as zip libraries like bzip2 and there is also the
> >> python toolset.
> >>
> >> My current method of doing this is to link a 32-bit user-config to
> >> user-config.jam when I do 32-bit compile and a 64-bit user-config to
> >> user-config.jam when I do a 64-bit compile, but this has always seemed
> >> to me to be kludgy even if it does work, and I am hoping that bjam has
> >> the ability to solve this without my kludge.
> >
> > Solved ! Evidently with 'using' rule for the various compilers and tools
> > I can add target alternatives in the requirements section and so can
> > have <address-model>32 and <address-model>64 to achieve my goal.
>
> I spoke too soon. Using the <address-model>32 and <address-model>64 as
> target alternatives in toolset 'using' statements does not work to
> distinguish 'using' statements with the same name and version. Instead I
> get from Boost Build the error of:
>
> error: duplicate initialization of xxx with the following parameters etc.
>
> for toolset 'xxx', as in
>
> using xxx : nnn : some_command : <address-model>32 ;
> using xxx : nnn : some_other_command : <address-model>64 ;
>
> I guess I must go back to my original kludge as there seems to be no way
> to have Boost Build pick out the correct toolset based on whether I am
> compiling with a 32-bit or 64-bit address model.
>

You can add a global toolset requirement to do that selection. Some
toolsets initializations take those extra arguments and apply it. For
example:

using gcc : : c++ -fx32 : : <address-model>32 ;

But the common ones don't have that, yet. Instead you can go the post init
route:

using toolset ;
using clang : 9.1 : g++ ;
toolset.add-requirements
<toolset>clang,<address-model>32:<toolset-clang:version>9.1 ;

The syntax for that long requirements might need some tweaking for your use
case.

-- 
-- Rene Rivera
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net

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