|
|
Boost Testing : |
From: Roland Schwarz (roland.schwarz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-01 07:54:29
Rene Rivera wrote:
> Following up on Aleksey's response, and the CVS->SVN move. We need the
> following testers to do a run against the 1.34.1 release tag:
> speedsnail-borland-d (Windows)
> - borland-5.8.2
> speedsnail-gcc-d (Windows)
> - gcc-cygwin-3.4.4
> - gcc-mingw-3.4.2
> - gcc-mingw-3.4.5
> speedsnail-msvc-d (Windows)
> - msvc-6.5
> - msvc-7.0
> - msvc-7.1
> - msvc-8.0
> speedsnail-msvc-dp (Windows)
> - msvc-6.5_stlport4
> - msvc-7.1_stlport4
>
> For those getting the sources from CVS... If you can manage to start the
> run before CVS goes down, you'll need to change the --tag to
> --tag=Version_1_34_1.
>
> For those getting the sources from a tarball... You'll need to download
> the 1.34.1 tarball manually from SourceForge, and add a
> --local=/path/to/boost_1_34_1.tar.bz2 option.
>
I have done exactly this:
Got the sources from Sourceforge and supplied the --tag=Version_1_34_1
The results happened to be uploaded to
ftp://fx.meta-comm.com/boost-regression/boost_1_34_1
which I still doubt is the correct place to be picked up by the status
page scripts. But I may be wrong...
However I placed copies to
ftp://fx.meta-comm.com/boost-regression/CVS-RC_1_34_0
also.
What puzzles me more, is that the tags of the log files read a strange date:
speedsnail-msvc-dp.2007-06-05-04-01-39.log.zip
which happens to be the very same date as my previous run.
So it seems I have just wasted processor cycles. Yes?
Did I really run with the latest version?
Roland