Boost C++ Libraries: Ticket #12193: Improved PathScale compiler support https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193 <p> The current code to support <a class="missing wiki">PathScale</a> compilers seems to be severely outdated. It makes some assumptions that are no longer correct, and result in building broken boost libraries (e.g. option parsing code causes segmentation faults). </p> <p> For quite some time pathcc is quite compatible with clang and supports clang feature checks. Since clang is much better maintained, I figured it would be best to make <a class="missing wiki">PathScale</a> compiler headers reuse the definitions provided by clang headers. </p> <p> I've also added some flag definitions to match supported subset of flags. </p> en-us Boost C++ Libraries /htdocs/site/boost.png https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193 Trac 1.4.3 Michał Górny <mgorny@…> Thu, 12 May 2016 10:42:51 GMT attachment set https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193 <ul> <li><strong>attachment</strong> → <span class="trac-field-new">0002-Update-for-pathscale-6.patch</span> </li> </ul> Ticket John Maddock Mon, 16 May 2016 17:42:20 GMT component changed; owner set https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193#comment:1 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193#comment:1 <ul> <li><strong>owner</strong> set to <span class="trac-author">John Maddock</span> </li> <li><strong>component</strong> <span class="trac-field-old">None</span> → <span class="trac-field-new">config</span> </li> </ul> Ticket John Maddock Sun, 16 Apr 2017 17:55:57 GMT status changed; resolution set https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193#comment:2 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12193#comment:2 <ul> <li><strong>status</strong> <span class="trac-field-old">new</span> → <span class="trac-field-new">closed</span> </li> <li><strong>resolution</strong> → <span class="trac-field-new">fixed</span> </li> </ul> <p> I've applied the patches for Boost.Config: the remaining patches apply to other Boost libraries in different repositories. Sorry, but I'm not going to split those up into separate PR's for all those other libraries, and as they mostly look cosmetic (warning control?) are I assume less important anyway. </p> Ticket