Re: [boost] Cygwin tests (Was: [1.61] Two weeks remaining for new libraries and breaking changes)

Subject: Re: [boost] Cygwin tests (Was: [1.61] Two weeks remaining for new libraries and breaking changes)
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-02-18 13:00:35

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 2/17/16 11:47 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>
>> But I do have to make a choice.  My options are
>>>
>>> a) spend time with b2 development along the lines that Stephen has
>>> suggested.
>>>
>>
>> Steven has provided a patch, you only need to apply it and try again. Do
>> you
>> think you can allocate 5 minutes for this some time soon?
>>
>
> I don't think it's 5 min - it never is.  But I'll try to find some
> (more) time to do this.  If our testing system was more helpful,
> Stephen could make the change on develop and check it and watch
> the b2 test results.  THAT might be 5 minutes. I realize that this
> presumes that cygwin/mingw are not being tested by the test volunteers so
> this criticism is a little unfair. I do have ideas on how to address this -
> but they're too far off topic for this thread. - even for me.

FYI.. B2 has a develop and master branch. And, yes, Stephen could have
check his patch in. But, I suspect, he decided it would be safer and faster
to have you try it out since you had a repeatable failure case. Than to
subject others using the b2 develop branch to an experiment.

-- 
-- Rene Rivera
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net
-- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail