Subject: Re: [boost] [release] Boost 1.66.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 1
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-11-16 16:48:37
On 16.11.2017 11:33, Daniel James via Boost wrote:
> On 16 November 2017 at 16:16, Stefan Seefeld via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> OK, thanks. I have committed
>> and will merge to master once the change cycles through a round of
>> tests. (I have to admit that I find it extremely daunting to navigate
>> the online test matrix. There are so many false positives that it's hard
>> to spot actual failures.)
> Presumably a lot of those are due to python not being available or
> properly set up, would it be possible to detect this in boost build?
Of course !
I agree, such situations should be flagged much earlier, and the
Boost.Python build (and tests) skipped. Sometime however the failure is
different, though, but with the same net effect: rendering the test
results useless as the failures don't tell anything about the code, but
rather the testing platform setup.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk