[boost] Re: [Boost.Test] New testing procedure?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-22 21:16:19

"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Because I don't have the capability to do that across all boost libraries. 
> I'm thinking I should be able to say things like: (not real syntax)
>   bjam --torture_test --static_link_only
>   bjam --basic_test --dynamic_link_only
>   bjam --torture_test --all_link_options

And we're going to have test servers all over the world doing
different combinations of these?  I just don't see how we'd manage
it, and how the results would be really useful.  And why should
any server pick one particular kind of linking?

What about the libraries that require a particular kind of linking?
Is this runtime library linking or boost library linking selection?

> I'm sure there's a way to set something like this up with Jamfile as well.
> Obviously for it to be useful boost-wide we would need to get library authors
> to agree to some standard.  As for regression testers their automated setup
> could pick the level and linking options.  The linking options would save time
> by not building 4 variations of a linked library for each
> compiler.  

They don't do that now, unless the particular tests are configured to
use all the different variations.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com