Re: [boost] [Test][Thread] Regression since 9 December?

Subject: Re: [boost] [Test][Thread] Regression since 9 December?
From: Adam Wulkiewicz (adam.wulkiewicz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-14 08:27:26

Hi Raffi,

Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
> Adam Wulkiewicz <adam.wulkiewicz <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> And in the past Timer was built automatically with Test but this commit
>> have changed it
>>
> https://github.com/boostorg/test/commit/fa6f4f34bed04e938b4020df51918c776b77402a
Or maybe it was this change:
https://github.com/boostorg/test/pull/15

>> ?
> Right, I rolled it back. I erroneously thought boost.timer being a header
> only library. Apparently this worked fine on darwin.
>
>> Anyway, how do you suggest libraries authors should modify the tests?
>> What should be the best practice for tests using minimal/header-only Test.
>> Should we just specify <library>/boost/timer//boost_timer or is there
>> some more preferable way?
> For symbols of boost.timer missing, I would say "do nothing" as it should be
> handled by boost.test. Please bug me (offline if you prefer) once you have
> the test results.

I saw that you tried to "fix" the issue in the latest commits to Test 
but it didn't help. It's still required to link against Timer or Test, 
see e.g. the failing Atomic tests vs the Geometry tests.
So currently the usage of header-only version of Test probably has 
little sense.
Or am I missing something?

Regards,
Adam