Re: [boost] Re: Sun C++ regression tests missing?

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-22 08:02:38

> OK, I'll start running them again tomorrow.  Its just uncommenting a
> line in a shell script, no biggie.
>
> FWIW, there had been numerous comments to the effect of "why do we
> even bother with this compiler?", and noone ever responded to my
> numerous threats to stop running the regression tests with SunPRO, so
> I just stopped them last week to save cycles.  I didn't think they
> would be missed.

Fair enough.  If only we could figure out why Boost.Test was failing (it 
looked like a legitimate compiler error), we could probably get the failure 
rate down quite a bit.

> Who should I work with to get the appropriate tests marked as
> known-to-fail or N/A?   This exercise is necessary for some
> gcc-on-Solaris tests as well.  For instance, all of the "*_lib" tests
> in Boost.Thread fail because "gcc -static" won't link with *any*
> shared libs.  Solaris does not provide static versions of -lrt or
> -lthread, so these tests fail to link.  There really should really be
> a "-prefer-static" option to gcc..  Alternately, the Jamfiles could be
> hacked to use -Wl,-Bstatic / -Wl,-Bdynamic guards around the inclusion
> of the Boost.Thread lib for these tests.

That would probably be my preferred option, is it just a case of 
adding -Wl,-Bdynamic to the very end of the command line?  Rene would 
probably know the best way to fix this.

John.