Re: [Boost-build] [python] [bbv2] py-run vs. bpl-test

From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-29 05:56:36

David Abrahams wrote:

> Markus Schöpflin <markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
>> Interestingly, all of the failing tests either use the jam rule run or 
>> py-run. All tests using the rule bpl-test are working fine.
> 
> I think I fixed that case.

Thank you.

[...]

> 
>> What is the intended difference between these two test rules? 
> 
> One runs python, which dynamically loads extension modules.  The other
> runs a user program that embeds python.

So, bpl-test runs python and run/py-run runs a user program, right?

>> Why isn't there just one test rule?
> 
> They're totally different.
> 
>> And does anyone know why it works in one case, but not the other?
> 
> Python is already linked with libz on those platforms where it's
> required.

So the explanation why it works at Comsoft but not at HP TestDrive, which 
are the same platform, is that at HP the libpython2.4.a somehow contains 
references to libz and at Comsoft it doesn't.

HP:

 > nm libpython2.4.a | grep adler32
adler32                          | 0000000000000000 | U | 0000000000000008
 >

Comsoft:

 > nm libpython2.4.a | grep adler32
 >

Ok, I think I understood that now. This difference probably results from 
the fact that when compiling python at the TestDrive machine I linked libz 
statically, but not when compiling at Comsoft.

Maybe I should change that, because the static libz will most probably not 
be found by the link process, as it's not installed in a standard location.

Markus