[boost] Re: [tokenizer] Any expert in bjam?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-29 12:17:05

Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin_at_[hidden]> writes:

> tokenizer is regressing for msvc-stlport as shown in
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3mkvx
>
> The same kind of problem happens at the following
> cells wich are marked as expected failures:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/44pbx
> http://tinyurl.com/5xd8z
>
> I've built these tests locally for msvc-stlport locally (from my
> IDE) and they work just fine. No fundamental problem with
> this platform. So I guess the problem lies in the corresponding
> Jamfile entries (located directly in boost/status/Jamfile):
>
>     test-suite tokenizer
>         : [ run libs/tokenizer/examples.cpp
> <lib>../libs/test/build/boost_test_exec_monitor ]
>           [ run libs/tokenizer/simple_example_1.cpp ]
>           [ run libs/tokenizer/simple_example_2.cpp ]
>           [ run libs/tokenizer/simple_example_3.cpp ]
>           [ run libs/tokenizer/simple_example_4.cpp ]
>           [ run libs/tokenizer/simple_example_5.cpp ]
>         ;
>
> I'm pretty sure this is related to some messing up of stdlibs binaries
> (I vaguely recall that STLPort does not work with single-thread static
> runtime lib), but my skills of Jamfile are lousy. Could somebody please
> have a look at it?
>
> Another thing that left me wondering is that examples 1, 2 and 4
> have the same structure as 3 and 5, and yet they do not fail.

This is not fundamentally a problem that requires bjam expertise to
diagnose.  I suggest "building" the test with bjam -n -a and looking
at the command lines it generates to see what the problem might be.

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