Subject: Re: [boost] [EXTERNAL] [mpl] [build] [testing] Merge pull requests
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-09-20 04:03:07
On Saturday 20 September 2014 00:26:26 Belcourt, Kenneth wrote:
> On Sep 19, 2014, at 12:27 AM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]>
> > Kenneth,
> dba Noel
Sorry, I took the name from your email address. I've never heard of "dba"
before, I suppose its your alias for Boost activity?
> > I've already explained why the problem has likely appeared, and
> > moving back to the monolithic MPL is what covers it. It's not the fix.
> Weâre in agreement that implicit-dependency is broken for some reason. But
> note that several of our internal projects utilize BB implicit-dependency
> and it works fine for us. My concern is that these projects will break
> when they pull Boost with this change, and this may well happen to other
Well, now that you're aware of the problem, you can prevent pulling from Boost
until implicit-dependency is fixed. And the problem was already released with
1.56, so users who updated are affected. Since there were not many reports I'd
assume Boost.Build (or specifically implicit-dependency) is not widely used in
> > That's what my second PR achieves, and I think this is the correct
> > fix. Did you try it?
> Yes, it works on Linux, but Iâm still reluctant to apply it without a firm
> understanding why the random tester behavior is occurring. Iâm sort of
> okay with wholesale failure but Iâm not okay with some RHEL and Ubuntu
> testers working okay, others failing.
Ok, lets's find the difference between the failing and running testers. Do you
have access to a running one?
> > You can revert MPL if you still want to, but I honestly don't know how
> > else
> > (on the MPL side) we can do this.
> I guess thatâs really the question I plan to investigate (while the develop
> testers are all working correctly).
I restored my modularization branch and incorporated the commit from
https://github.com/boostorg/mpl/pull/12 just in case so that the work is not
lost. If you revert MPL, you can pull from that branch instead of develop to
reproduce the failing behavior.
Let me know if I should do anything else.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk