Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-12 13:33:11

Rene Rivera wrote:
> Robert Ramey wrote:
>> Is there a reason that bjam and the rest of boost build can't be
>> handled as any other library as regards to testing and release?
>> Specifically, I would like to see somethiing like:
>> libs/bjam
>> /build
>> Jamfile
>> /test
>> Jamfile // testing bjam build and test
>> compile-fail.cpp
>> assert-fail.cpp
>> ...
>> So that bjam is automatically tested on all platforms when ever its
>> changed. Of course this test/build would be run using the "released
>> bjam" which would be updated when show stopping bugs are fixed and
>> after the
>> fixed version has been tested.
>> It might also provide a place to test tool configuraiton files and
>> the like
> I don't understand what you are asking. The current testing uses a
> "frozen" version of bjam with the understanding that we want testing
> tools to be as stable as possible.

I'm aware if this and agree with it.

What I'm asking is for is that changes to bjam, process_jam_log, etc as well
as jam files
be subjected to the same testing procedure that other boost libraries are
subjected to.

Robert Ramey

Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at