Boost Testing :
From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-25 13:25:24
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 10:18:46 -0500, Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 15:36:53 -0500, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>
>>> Niko Demmel wrote:
>>> Yea, we need to make new instructions.
>> I'd much prefer Boost.Build to reduce the level of the initial
>> setup hassle, which has raised significantly by v1 to v2 switch.
>> The more intimidating and demanding the setup instructions are,
>> the less volunteers we get.
> The V2 specific instructions, found at:
> involve writing two lines in user-config.jam.
Firt of all, you *have* to have user-config.jam, which is a usability
regression from v1 (from regression.py user's standpoint anyway).
Second of all, and we had this discussion before , I do believe
that the whole toolset pre-declaration business is redudant and we can
do better. Repeating myself, if Python's distutils can do it, so can we.
> Everything else is regression.py voodoo.
regression.py does not require anything else, that's the point. We've
spent a considerable amount of thought to make its requirements
as simple as
* Python 2.3 or higher
* Some spare disk space (~5 Gb per each tested compiler)
Naturally, its upsetting for us to see these degrade without a good
-- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering