From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-21 11:37:07
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 04:52:23PM -0700, Jeff Garland wrote:
>>Seems like the real variation here is in OS's. Of course, there are hundreds
>>of Linux distros so Linux isn't just Linux -- not sure which one to pick
> But there's only one glibc, which they all use. Different glibc versions
> shouldn't be _too_ different, for Boost's purposes.
In my experience, they make a difference. And there's not only one
glibc, since there are also many versions of it. Tests also depend on
the kernel version, on the CPU(s), on the version of the system
compiler, on the Python version et cetera.
So just pick one, it
> shouldn't matter which.
It does matter, unfortunately.
A distro that doesn't ship with Boost might make
> sense, since presumably the distros that provide precompiled versions of
> Boost are already testing it.
I doubt any distributor runs the regression tests.
In fact, support for Boost packages on various Linux distributions isn't
too great. There's no reason to expect distributors to run the tests.
Also, it actually doesn't matter whether a distribution tested the Boost
version it has a package for. It's an already released version which
might even contain patches from the distributor. We're talking about
testing from the CVS, though.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk