Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-10 20:20:14

At 04:11 PM 8/10/2003, Martin Wille wrote:

 >I added gcc-3.3.1 to the Linux tests for CVS HEAD.
 >
 >Test failures have been down to 1% for gcc versions 3.2.3 and 3.3 a
 >few weeks ago. I think 3.2.3 and 3.3.1 would be good candidates for
 >being release criteria.

OK, let's use 3.2.3 and 3.3.1 as the Linux release criteria. Since someone 
has to research every failure, and this is our first release using formal 
criteria, we don't want to go overboard.

 >6 tests fail for 3.2.3 and 6 tests fail for 3.3.1
 >
 >
 > From the list I recently posted 1 failure has been fixed and
 >1 failure is due to a compiler error and not considered harmful.
 >
 >That leaves
 >
 >     function::sum_avg_portable
 >     math::octonion_test
 >     math::quaternion_test
 >     test::errors_handling_test
 >
 >to be fixed or to be explained. Note, all these tests fail for
 >both CVS HEAD and RC_1_30_0.

I've just installed 3.3.1 on Windows, and am getting those same four 
failure plus failures from:

      date_time/testmicrosec_time_clock (runtime failure)
      iterator/interoperable_fail (compile_fail test isn't failing)

That seems like a reasonable number to fix or otherwise account for.

--Beman