From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-28 12:26:28
I checked in a modification to status/Jamfile on the test-development branch
(comments near top of file). I did this at Beman's request; he's been
wanting to build the html regression results table through Jam for a while.
So far, he's just running a .bat file over the results of these
modifications, but we're only a short step from being able to do the whole
thing through Jam.
The mods are on test-development because:
1. They need some build actions filled in for platforms other than NT
2. I dashed them off in a few hours and they've not been thoroughly tested.
However, this is a direction I intend to go with for testing. It would be
great if Joerg could merge his work with this stuff.
Richard Geiger take not:
Interestingly, these changes seem to show that the FAIL_EXPECTED Jam
extension is unneccessary as long as we have the extended NOCARE semantics
for targets with build actions. If this proves to be the case we should
throw out FAIL_EXPECTED.
David Abrahams, C++ library designer for hire
C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org)
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk