David Abrahams writes:
"Jeff Garland" <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com> writes:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:22:53 -0500, David Abrahams wrote
Boost.Build does dependency analysis; there's no reason to re-run everything from scratch.
It seems to be broken at the moment,
If you mean, "can't trace dependencies generated by macros" like
#include FOO(bar)
then yes, it's "broken." If there are other problems, I'm surprised to hear it.
From http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?Boost.Testing:
* Incremental testing is not reliable: * Marked as expected-to-fail tests are rerun. There is not point to rerun tests if the library is marked as unusable or the test is marked as expected to fail on particular toolset. BBv1 running in testing mode should accept the list of tests which are disabled. * The obsolete tests (test which do not exists any more) are still included in the test results. The tests which have been removed still have their test results in the component directories. * Jamfiles/rule files are not included as dependencies. * bjam doesn't track dependencies if they were included as #include MACRO -- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering