Re: [boost] [build] Headers rule does both too much and too little

Subject: Re: [boost] [build] Headers rule does both too much and too little
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-18 14:13:39

On 18/02/2014 18:57, Peter Dimov wrote:
> John Maddock wrote:
>> Too little:
>>
>> The headers under boost/config/ are included via macros so aren't
>> placed in the dependency graph.  I can fix this easily enough in the
>> Boost.Config tests, but ideally this should be fixed at the top level
>> by making everything under boost/config/ a dependency of
>> boost/config.hpp.
>
> You can fix that from your side - if you're so inclined - by including
> the omitted headers in an #if 0 block to enable the scanner to see them.
>
> Currently a number of tests seems to be failing due to a missing
> config/user.hpp, so it's a real problem. But there's also something else
> that is wrong with the headers, as other tests seem to be using older
> header versions, and that doesn't seem to be caused by a missed dependency.

I see that as well - there are quite a number of failures in the Math 
lib tests which I simply do not see locally (and a few of us have tried 
to reproduce).  There are frankly too many to try and track down one at 
a time by pestering the test-runners: who probably have better things to 
do anyway.  Frankly it's all rather discouraging :-(

John.