[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       boost-users
Subject:    Re: [Boost-users] boost and STLport using VC++ 7.1
From:       "Victor A. Wagner Jr." <vawjr () rudbek ! com>
Date:       2005-03-31 14:51:03
Message-ID: 6.2.0.14.2.20050331074950.0a03da18 () mail ! rudbek ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

At Wednesday 2005-03-30 22:48, you wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I'm trying to build boost using VC++ 7.1 against STLport 5.0 rc2. The
>very first library that is built is boost_date_time.dll and the
>compiler chokes on greg_month.cpp. The full bjam output is at the end
>of the message.
>
>Some background info, that may be useful:
>- I can successfully build boost without STLport using this this
>   command:
>   bjam "-sTOOLS=vc-7_1" "-sBUILD=debug release <runtime-link>dynamic 
> <threading>multi" --prefix=..\boost --builddir=..\boost-obj install
>- when using STLport I build using:
>   bjam "-sTOOLS=vc-7_1-stlport" "-sSTLPORT_PATH=..\STLport\stlport" 
> "-sBUILD=debug release <runtime-link>dynamic <threading>multi" 
> --prefix=..\boost --builddir=..\boost-obj install
>- if I let the building process continue, it builds about 60% of all
>   libraries
>- I need to use STLport5 because it supports VC++ 7.1 out of the box
>- I've tried building CVS/HEAD version of boost as well as the latest
>   released version 1.32
>
>So, has anybody tried building this combination?

I'm curious, why do you need to use STLport at all?  The one that comes 
with 7.1 seems to be working rather well "out of the box" (see the 
regressions run by RudbekAssociates (that's me)).


>Thanks in advance. Here is the full output.
>Oleg.

Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
               "There oughta be a law" 


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]