[Boost-testing] Re: Re: Intel 7.1-linux tarball results

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-17 11:55:16

I was considering the situation whereby a particular compiler/configuration
fails all or most of the test because of some issue in the test computer's
build configurtation.  Since the "release package" just points to the test
results, they can be updated at anytime after the release.  So I don't see
that this test problem should hold up the release.

That's all I meant to say.

Robert Ramey

"Aleksey Gurtovoy" <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:m1mzxgfw72.fsf_at_tulip.office.meta...
> Robert Ramey writes:
> > Isn't this a link from the 1.32 release package.
>
> I'm sorry, but the question doesn't make sense to me. What _is_ "a
> link from the 1.32 release package"? For that matter, what's "1.32
> release package"? We didn't release yet; we only have "final draft
> tarballs", and the link I posted points to the reports for those.
>
> > Can't the link just be left and point to the updated results?
>
> Please be more specific: which link? left where?
>
> > In fact, isn't possible that a newer version of a compiler (e.g. gcc
> > 3.4.3?) comes out and we want to re-run show updated test results
> > eventhough the 1.32 package is frozen.
>
> OK, I understand this one :). Yes, it's surely possible, and we can
> easily do that.
>
> > I don't see this has having anything to do with release drafts.
>
> Depends what "this" is. The results at
> http://www.meta-comm.com/engineering/boost-regression/developer/index.html
> most definitely report the status of the draft tarballs.
>
> --
> Aleksey Gurtovoy
> MetaCommunications Engineering