Re: [Boost-users] Using 'address-model-32_64' on Mac OS 10.6

On Jan 10, 2010, at 11:37 PM, Boris Dušek wrote:

Hello Dane,

On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Dane Springmeyer wrote:

...

I'm now trying to compile boost (I happen to be using trunk), and am noticing that passing 'address-model-32_64' does not seem to have the effect I'd expect. If the flag is passed the only affect I notice is that the build directories include it 'address-model-32_64' in the path, but notably the '-arch -i386 -arch x86_64' flags are not properly added to the CXXFLAGS and LINKFLAGS. Therefore the compiled dynamic libraries are still single architecture, x86_64.

Passing 'architecture=combined' does prompt these flags, but includes the 'arch ppc' flag as well which I don't want. So, is it a bug that using address-model alone does not work or am I am misunderstanding something?

First check that you are using address-model=32_64, not address-model-32_64.

Right, I spelled it wrong when re-typing in the email, but have it right in the bjam command.

Not sure whether the second works, but the first one is what I know for sure that works (works = just specifies the option in this case).

To have Intel-only universal binary with IA32 and Intel64 architectures, use architecture=x86 along with address-model=32_64.

Great, that did it! Thanks so much! Dane