Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-23 12:32:46

At 12:17 PM 7/23/2002, Jeff Garland wrote:

>I wonder then if it would be of benefit to generate one .html file for
>.xml file instead of combining them? I noticed when I
>hit one of the 'Fail' links and then returned to summary page that all of

>the 'Fail' links where colored as if I had visited each
>one. It would be nice if only the one I actually navigated to was
>highlighted. Since web browsers only track visits on the file
>level this would require one html file per toolset per test.

I considered that, but the management of all those files would be a serious
problem in our current environment. Moving them across the Internet to a
server is a problem. If we had control over the server, we could probably
work something out, but that is hard to do as it stands now.

>I also agree with Dave that an overall summary page by library would be a

>really nice. The page is already long and as boost
>grows and adds more tests this is going to get out of hand. I'm thinking

>something like:
> Summary Results for 2002-07-23 15:24:00 for Win32 -- 3 toolsets:
> * GCC 3.1
> * Borland
> * Metroworks
> library #tests failures warn missing
> filesystem 3 0 1 0
> thread 1 0 1 0
> tokenizer 5 2 0 0
>Library names would then hyperlink to an html file which contains only
>results for that library.

Yes, although we'll have to minimize the number of files unless we can
figure out how to manage large numbers of files.

>Finally, from the library author perspective is there a reference for
>we need to do to get our tests plugged into the system?

Basically, just add your tests to status/Jamfile. It is fairly

>Great work!



PS: I've just refreshed the files, in the process of testing the script to
be run automatically. Changed to reporting only tests that didn't pass on
all compilers. Still at

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at