Re: [boost] Boost-wide report -- explicit failure markup not working?

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-31 06:41:31

Vladimir Prus writes:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
>> Looking at the boost-wide reports today, testmicrosec_time_clock is
>> marked as failing red on a whole series of compilers.  However,
>> they should be 'green' (and have been in past reports) as they have
>> been explicitly marked as failing:
>
> I noted the same thing. 
>
>    http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/cs-win32_metacomm/developer/program_options.html
>
> has only a couple of yellow cells and boost-wide reports have a huge
> number of yellow ones.

There *was* a configuration problem with Boost-wide reports that did
lead to a stale markup, but in general the comparison above (or at
least the wording) is not valid -- there are more platforms in the
Boost-wide reports than in any platform-specific ones, and therefore
counting overall number of cells of a particular color doesn't make
much sense.

>
> While we're at it, I have two questions about boost-wide regression
> reports
>
> 1. How they are related with individual reports? Are they generated from 
> individual reports.

They are generated from the same logs, yes.

>
> 2. Old style reports showed warnings, for example see:
>
>     http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/cs-Linux.html
>
> New style reports do not. I find it not very good. I'd really want
> boost to be warning-free on gcc 3.4 and fixed some errors
> already. But I'm not sure the above page is up-to-date, and it's
> hard to search for warning in it. Maybe, new style reports could
> show warnings too?

Put on the TODO list.

-- 
Aleksey Gurtovoy
MetaCommunications Engineering