Boost logo

Boost Testing :

Subject: [Boost-testing] Smaller Windows Builds
From: Tom Kent (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-04 21:37:28

A while ago there was a thread (most of what is on here: about how
windows test runs were incredibly large (>50GB).

It was observed that this was because the jam rule RmTemps wasn't
taking care of the .obj and .pdb (and other) temp files that should be
deleted after each test:

> Subject: Re: [Boost-testing] Trunk testing (general) and MSVC11
> From: Christoph Macheiner (christoph.macheiner_at_[hidden])
> Date: 2012-08-27 10:48:53
> "Eric Niebler" <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > On 8/24/2012 1:00 PM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
> >> On 08/24/2012 12:39 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
> >>> I'm guessing
> >>> most of the space is debug information. Is there a way to turn that off?
> >>
> >> Add <debug-symbols>off to the requirements.
> >
> > Done. Thanks, Steven. test_actions.obj alone goes from 63Mb to 12Mb.
> > Many of the other .obj files are also dramatically smaller. This easily
> > outweighs the extra build of the test framework that it requires, which
> > only takes up 22Mb.
> Imho, <debug-symbols>off is not the solution to this issue. There is a
> "RmTemps" jam rule that is called after each test, but it only deletes the
> .exe, and leaves the rest of the build output (why it is done like this I
> have no clue). I'd say everything should be built with debug-symbols (to be
> able to debug failures), and the RmTemps rule should probably delete the
> complete build output on success, and leave everything in case of a failure.
> Of course, this might require more changes other than to the RmTemps rule
> alone (and I have no idea how to achieve this). Anybody know how to do this?
> This would reduce the disk usage to "almost nothing", during the run as well
> as afterwards.

I'm guessing that there hasn't been much work towards a fix for this,
since they runs are still >50GB. :-(

I recently got access to a machine to setup as a tester, but it only
has just under 50GB of space available. It would be great to get
another tester running, but I can't unless we fix the cleanup problem.
Does anyone have any further information about this? Ideas how to fix


Boost-testing list run by mbergal at