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
> 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
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 http://www.esva.net/~beman/jam_regr.html
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk