David Abrahams writes:
Misha Bergal <mbergal@meta-comm.com> writes:
David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
I posted this yesterday, but got no reply. Can anyone explain the vast number of white cells in the Boost.Python regression log? In particular, the tests noted below don't look like they're reported correctly in the log.
White cells (missing test results) are caused by inability of process_jam_log (utility which produces xml result files from bjam log) to handle Boost.Python tests compile/link/execute failures.
Having done some research I believe that the main problem is that the following bjam.log snippet:
...skipped <@boost!libs!python!test\args.test\msvc-stlport\debug\threading-multi>args.run for lack of <@boost!libs!python!test\args.test\msvc-stlport\debug\threading-multi>args.pyd...
is treated by process_jam_log as:
1. Failed to build "args.run" in directory "args.test/..." because file args.pyd in the _same directory_ is missing.
2. If it is in the same directory, then it is something internal to args.test and it and failure to build it has already been processed and all relevant info has been dumped into xml results file in "args.test/..." directory. So process_jam_log just skips this message.
The real situation is different (I am speculating here - our boost regression machine is in the middle of clean run, so I don't have all logs etc.)
For one, args_ext.pyd was built in args_ext.pyd directory and xml result file with failure was written in args_ext.pyf/... directory.
It is not clear to me what happens in Boost.Python build next.
At this point I would appreciate if somebody clarified to me how Boost.Python build works, so I can figure out how to handle it in process_jam_log.
Sorry, I don't remember :(
I'll try to do an analysis later today. Thanks for looking at this.
Dave, did you have a chance to look at it? -- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering