From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-19 12:48:11
At 09:35 AM 3/19/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>> I am currently doing a search for other places where borland v 0x0561
>> assumed, as I don't think the latest patch fixed any issues that would
>> affect boost and it would be a shame to have to choose between boost
>> the patch.
>OK, borland 0x561 is assumed in quite a few spirit files (spirit.dev
>list informed), quite a lot of the MPL (around 20 files) and
>Unfortunately we are still certifying that patch here, and the PC it is
>on does not have easy access to Boost CVS, I cannot test in a reasonable
>frame for 1_30 (which I assume means testing today at the latest.)
>However, there are no issues addressed in that patch that would resolve
>boost workarounds that I am aware of, and suggest the safest solution
>might be to simply update the version check to 0x564 in all those
>files. At the worst we provide an extra unneeded workaround. The
>alternative is that these libraries, or libraries that rely on them, are
>quite likely to fail with the latest borland compiler.
>Of course, it is very easy to ask for sweeping changes right on the line
>when you aren't the release manager! If there is time I would very much
>like to push for the change though.
There just isn't any time left. See "OK to tag for release?" message just
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk