From: David Daeschler (daveregs_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-26 16:00:41
>You can pass --preserve-test-targets to bjam to suppress that behavior.
Ha, that's easier then hitting ctrl+c in the middle of the build, thanks :).
> So what is the difference in command-line options vs. whatever you
> invoked to build/run the boost regression tests
To build the regression I go to lib/filesystem/test and run [ bjam
"-sTOOLS=mingw" ] without the stage.
> you should consider whether there's just an outright bug in the test
I did, but it's basically the same line as the simple_ls program and
compiling that and giving it a full path breaks too.
ls sample: http://boost.org/libs/filesystem/example/simple_ls.cpp
> fs::path( argv, fs::native )
Thank you for your time,
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "David Daeschler" <daveregs_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Thanks to that output (-a -odump.txt ), I found something interesting
>> doing testing.
>> When you run the tests on the boost filesystem, it builds a static
>> It then deletes the library when the tests are over.
> That's so that when we're doing the big regression tests we don't fill
> up testers' disks needlessly. You can pass --preserve-test-targets to
> bjam to suppress that behavior.
>> If I break the build right after it builds this test library and
>> then link to that library from my test program, the program executes
>> without an exception!
>> For some reason the library that the tests are building is working, and
>> libraries that are built using [ jam "-sTOOLS=mingw" stage ] are not
>> I am very confused now. Any help will be greatly appreciated.
> I was suggesting that it has to do with the way you compiled your
> minimal.obj, and that you check that difference. However, since the
> library built for testing works with your minimal.obj it must be a
> difference in the way the library is being built for stage. So what
> is the difference in command-line options with
> bjam "-sTOOLS=mingw" stage
> vs. whatever you invoked to build/run the boost regression tests?
> Also, I guess you should consider whether there's just an outright bug
> in the test program, although it looks too simple to be wrong.
> Dave Abrahams
> Boost Consulting
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk