Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-12 02:01:21

David Abrahams wrote:
> Martin Wille writes:
> 
> 
>>David Abrahams wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In that case, can I release 1.30.2?  I don't like having the 1.30.1
>>>debacle hanging over my head.
>>
>>
>>There are new regressions on Linux (RC_1_30_0 branch):
>>http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/cs-Linux-rc-1_30_0/developer_summary_page.html
>>
>>
>>crc has regressions for gcc-3.1 and gcc-3.2.3
>>config, format and io have regressions for intel 7.1
> 
> 
> According to your chart, the following libraries are all regressing:
> 
>   config
>   crc
>   date_time
>   format
>   function
>   graph
>   io
>   math
>   multi_array
>   numeric/interval
>   numeric/ublas
>   optional
>   random
>   static_assert
>   test
>   type_traits
>   utility
> 
> Are these real regressions or just newly-tested compilers?  Can the
> library authors/maintainers address these problems?  Where is our
> maintenance wizard?

gcc.3.3.1/gcc 3.4 are newly tested.

The sixth line on the summary page says:
"Note: failures for gcc-3.3.1 and gcc-3.4 are all "unexpected"
because there are no 1.30.0 results to compare with."

gcc-3.4 can be ignored altogether. It isn't released yet (and very
likely has bugs).

The regressions I reported in the message you responded to
are real regressions.

If there is enough time left then I'll run the tests for
the 1.30.0 release and gcc-3.1.1. The chart for the
RC_1_30_0 branch should look better then.

Regards,
m