Subject: Re: [Boost-build] run versus unit-test
From: Ian Emmons (iemmons_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-28 09:48:11
I would greatly appreciate it if you had the time to respond to my
original query on this thread (which is quite different from Anatoli's).
On May 27, 2009, at 9:43 AM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
> Anatoli Sakhnik wrote:
>> I wish I could switch to the rule run either. Our code tends to
>> crash, deadlock and show other interesting things sometimes. So its
>> very convenient for us to have already built executable binary to
>> investigate it with gdb. Using the rule run, I needed to modify the
>> appropriate Jamfile, and build the binary in the second pass. That is
>> very inconvenient.
>> But the rule unit-test prepares the binary without additional
>> efforts. Thats why Im going to use unit-test in our new projects.
> The <preserve-test-targets>on feature will prevent the
> executable from being deleted by run.
> In Christ,
> Steven Watanabe
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