Boost logo

Boost :

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-12 10:54:47

Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:

> Part of your patch that I already committed + our fix to "testing.jam",
> yes. Your full second patch, no. The reason we append the library name in
> "testing.jam" instead of doing it in "process_jam_log" is that at the point
> of parsing the old bjam log's
> boost-test(RUN) "test1" : "libs\numeric\ublas\test1\test1.cpp"
> "libs\numeric\ublas\test1\test11.cpp"
> line you have no clue whether the test's *output directory* will be
> bin\boost\libs\numeric\ublas\test1.test
> or
> bin\boost\status\test1.test

There's one gotcha. uBLAS actually have duplicate definitions for tests.
There's libs/numeric/ublas/test1/Jamfile, which defines a single target of
type "exe", and there's status/Jamfile (which will be moved to
libs/numeric/ublas, which defines "run" target with exactly the same

This duplication is really bad, so it would be desirable to just "refer" to
ublas/test1/Jamfile from ublas/Jamfile. This is something that Boost.Build V2
Jamfile written by Michael does. But then the target path will be not




I wonder how regression tools can determine the library name in that case?

- Volodya

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