Vladimir Prus wrote:
I'm afraid that would require editing acc.jam, that toolset does not use the general mechanisms used to specify toolset options when configuring the toolset.
Something to look into, eventually... :-) Thanks for the reply! -boris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vladimir Prus" <ghost@cs.msu.su> To: <boost-users@lists.boost.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:48 PM Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Boost 1.33.1].[64-bit]
Boris Gubenko wrote:
Prashant Thakre wrote:
That would force users of boost to build 64-bit binaries even if they don't want to.
Most likely some users will and some won't: there is no way to satisfy all users with a single default.
The users wanting 32-bit libraries will either have to remove +DD64 or override it by adding +DD32 to the flags. I don't know bjam and Boost.Build v2 well enough to suggest how to override it outside acc.jam.
I'm afraid that would require editing acc.jam, that toolset does not use the general mechanisms used to specify toolset options when configuring the toolset.
- Volodya
_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users