On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:18:13 +0000 Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 10:25:08AM +0000, Andrew Benton wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 02:23:17 +0000 > > Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > As to space, boost is much smaller if you drop the static libs and the > > > debug versions of the libs. > > > > > How? Boost is not a standard configure/make thing as it uses cmake. > > I've no wish to figure out how cmake works but I would like to do away > > with static libs wherever possible. Should I just rm them after > > ./bjam install? > > > > Andy > > No cmake on my system. With boost_1_44_0 I run a single "build and > install" after I've built bjam. Thanks for that, I didn't know that boost could be built without cmake. I think when I first installed boost I was already installing cmake as it was needed by cdrkit so I didn't look for a way of avoiding cmake. I don't install cdrkit now (libisoburn FTW!) so boost is (was) the only thing still using it. I'm glad to be rid of cmake. > The bin.linux* directory where bjam > is created will change across architectures, but on x86_64 I use > > cd tools/jam/src > ./build.sh > cd ../../../ > > tools/jam/src/bin.linuxx86_64/bjam --layout=system \ > link=shared runtime-link=shared toolset=gcc threading=multi > variant=release \ > --prefix=/usr install > > (from their wiki). Thanks for that! Adding -j4 to the bjam options above to speeds things up a bit. Thanks again, Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
