on Mon Jun 02 2008, "troy d. straszheim"
wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> Yes, that's what bjam is doing today. It uses popen to invoke all the
>> commands and capture their output. To do the same with CMake you may
>> need to request/implement some patches (?)
>>
>
> Turns it
David Abrahams wrote:
[snip]
>
> Yes, that's what bjam is doing today. It uses popen to invoke all the
> commands and capture their output. To do the same with CMake you may
> need to request/implement some patches (?)
>
Turns it out wasn't necessary. :)
>>> Maybe we should pursue both track
on Sat May 31 2008, "troy d. straszheim"
wrote:
> It also knows which builds are pending, how many steps each contains,
> etc.
Don't we want to know that stuff? I do!
>>> Yeah, definitely. CTest does some of this but with mediocre resolution:
>>> it just reports Configure/Build/T
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Thu May 29 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote:
>
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> on Tue May 27 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote:
>>>
David Abrahams wrote:
>> - the model is simple. You ingest ctest's xml into the database, then
>>any view of the data that
on Thu May 29 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> on Tue May 27 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote:
>>
>>> David Abrahams wrote:
> - the model is simple. You ingest ctest's xml into the database, then
>any view of the data that you want to hack together, you
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Tue May 27 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote:
>
>> David Abrahams wrote:
- the model is simple. You ingest ctest's xml into the database, then
any view of the data that you want to hack together, you can.
>>> Not so different from the bitten model, is it?
>
