Re: [boost] Re: Python/Linux markup

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-23 10:27:03

David Abrahams writes:
> Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> David Abrahams writes:
>>> Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>
>>>> Should we mark Boost.Python as unusable with gcc 2.95.3/Intel 7.1-8.0
>>>> on Linux? The number of failures for these looks unhealthy --
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/5z3hy.
>>>
>>> Well, no, we should fix whatever is causing the regressions.  
>>
>> What regressions are you referring to? Everything besides
>> "data_members" has been failing in 1.31 as well. I was talking about
>> green/yellow failures -- about 1/3 of the tests fail; is the library
>> still usable in this state?
>
> Oh, I understand.  
>
> The problems with gcc-2 only occur when C++ exceptions are thrown and
> the framework catches them, which happens quite often in those
> tests.  So technically gcc-2 is usable if you're careful.

OK. Does that imply that somebody is going to look into fixing
"data_members" regression with gcc-2.95.3-linux*
(http://tinyurl.com/5p9jz)?

>
> As for Intel, it certainly used to work at some point, and I'm pretty
> sure LBL is using it successfully.  My guess is that it's a linking
> problem that we can correct.
>
>>> But as far as I can tell from the link you posted, only Intel 8.0
>>> is having a problem.
>>
>> And, judging from the Martin's 1.31 results XML, it's not a regression
>> either.
>
> I understand.  If we can't fix the supposed linking problem I think
> we should mark it unusable.

OK. 

Martin, could you please upload your latest regression's bjam log to
our FTP?

-- 
Aleksey Gurtovoy
MetaCommunications Engineering