[boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-10 21:50:10

Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:

> 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 is a compiler bug, which I guess ought to be reported again.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com