Re: [Boost-users] [unit test framework] undef ref to main() when dynlinking unit_test_framework lib, boost 1.34, linux

From: Chris Fairles (chris.fairles_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-30 13:08:15

Thanks for the quick reply. I have considered the automated test
suite. I guess one reason is that I wanted to be able to tweak the
logging formats.

Option 1 works, but for some reason I can't figure out how to link in
static files using automake heh... SOURCES in Makefile.am doesn't pick
up .a's for some reason. Friggen annoying and I scanned their docs all
day so i'm either blind, or they don't consider it a possibility. I've
been considering using boost.build but writing Jamfiles is trial and
error pretty much so its very time consuming (docs need a little
work).

I'll try option 2 for now. See how it fares.

Cheers,
Chris

On 4/30/07, Gennadiy Rozental <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi, Chris
>
> 1.34. version of Boost.Test made changes in design of the dynamic library
> based version of the UTF. Since there is no way to portably place function
> main() in shared library, it had to be moved into the header. You've got 3
> options:
>
> 1. Switch to the static library variant of the UTF. No changes required in
> your test module.
> 2. Use the automated registration facilities and define the macro
> BOOST_TEST_MAIN/BOOST_TEST_MODULE before boost/test/unit_test.hpp inclusion.
> In this case both function main() and an empty test module initialization
> function are generated as part of your test file automatically.
> 3. If you prefer to keep manually registered test cases and/or need to
> perform custom test module initialization you will have to comply to the an
> alternative initialization function signature and implement function main()
> yourself as direct forward  to the test runner supplied with dynamic library
> variant of the UTF:
>
> bool your_init_func()
> {
>     // do you initialization here
>     // register you test cases in master test suite:
>     // framework::master_test_suite.add( ... );
>
>     return true; // true - init successful, false - otherwise
> }
>
> int
> main( int argc, char* argv[] )
> {
>     return ::boost::unit_test::unit_test_main( &your_init_func, argc,
> argv );
> }
>
> In both cases 2 and 3 you need to define BOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK. I personally
> recommend you to consider option 2. You will soon find it much easier to
> manage and write new test module.
>
> HTH,
>
> Gennadiy
>
> "Chris Fairles" <chris.fairles_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:fac6bb500704300804g60679f0bk2a2e2f96c50a630c_at_mail.gmail.com...
> > Testing out boost beta 1.34. I built the whole she-bang with the gcc
> > toolset. I tried compling my unit tests and they all get:
> >
> > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../lib64/crt1.o: In
> > function `_start':
> > (.text+0x20): undefined reference to `main'
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >
> > I don't use the auto test case mechanism. My tests suites look like:
> >
> > #include "boost/test/unit_test.hpp"
> > using boost::unit_test::test_suite;
> >
> > void free_test_function() {
> >    BOOST_CHECK(1 == 1);
> > }
> >
> > test_suite*
> > init_unit_test_suite( int, char* [] ) {
> >    test_suite* test= BOOST_TEST_SUITE( "Unit test example 1" );
> >    test->add( BOOST_TEST_CASE( &free_test_function ) );
> >    return test;
> > }
> >
> > I compile using  g++ -Wall -I/usr/local/include/boost-1.34 -o
> > unit_test unit_test_test.cpp -L/usr/local/lib64
> > -lboost_unit_test_framework-gcc41-mt-d
> >
> > If i define BOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK either in the cpp file before or after
> > the unit_test.hpp include, or specifify it using -D on the command
> > line I get the same results.
> >
> > I tried to look through the headers responsible for defining
> > BOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK but theres a lot of references to "msvc
> > auto-linking" which I of course do not use. Should I be defining
> > BOOST_ALL_DYN_LINK ? I recall it not being set somewhere because
> > boost.build v2 doesn't like it or something.
> >
> > Really i can't make heads or tails of what I should be defining,
> > whether I shouldve defined something when building the unit test libs,
> > or whether I should be defining something building my own. The docs
> > say something about defining BOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK but as stated above,
> > it doesn't seem to make a difference.
> >
> > Chris
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>