Subject: Re: [boost] required toolsets
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-13 08:52:35
Le 12/04/13 16:39, Steven Watanabe a Ã©crit :
> On 04/12/2013 03:45 AM, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>>> failed to write output file
>>> The length of the file name is 260 characters and it is over the limits of the testing environment (i.e.
>>> Windows server 2012). Is it possible to make this path shorter without modifying the
>>> "C:\Users\BoostTest\Release" prefix?
>> I think you need to add the --hash option for b2/bjam to create smaller file/folder names.
> --abbreviate-paths is better as it leaves the result
> somewhat human readable, although it doesn't get
> as much compression. Also, the name of the test
> is a bit long. It really should be shortened.
Let analyze how the name could be shortened
*Where the build is stored* (49) :
C:\Users\BoostTest\Release\results\boost\bin.v2 -> The user can choose a
shorter path ( a big gain)
*The lib* (5+14+6=25): libs\multiprecision\test\ Nothing to do here
except rename the library name :(
The test specific name (46):
sf_concept_check_elliptic_cpp_dec_float_no_et. A little bit long and it
appear twice ->The author could choose a shorter name but this will
reduce not too much the global length. The author can choose names with
less than 31 characters (-15ch)
*The extension* (5) .test -> Couldn't the suffix be shorten .t (-3)
The toolset (10) \msvc-10.0 ->Nothing to (already taken in account by
The location depending on the variants (74)
. (already taken in account by
The name of the resources: ()
sf_concept_check_elliptic_cpp_dec_float_no_et.obj.rsp -> Couldn't an
option name all the files at these level just TEST.suffix? In this
particular case we move from 46 to 4.
* the user could reduce of 40 characters
* the boost build could yet reduce of 45 characters easily.
* --abbreviate-paths makes already a considerable reduction
* the author reduce of 15 characters and of 30 if the name is duplicated.
As you can see the reduction related to the test case name is the less significant, so I would suggest to take in priority the two others.
I have not used --hash so I don't know id this is the final solution.