|
|
Boost Testing : |
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-26 12:43:21
Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams writes:
>> Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>>> David Abrahams writes:
>>>>> Okay; I hadn't read Misha's log in that thread carefully before, but
>>>>> there's something screwy going on in the BBv1 code. There should be
>>>>> no const_argument.pyd targets there at all; the only pyds should be
>>>>> const_argument_ext.pyd. So I'm trying to track that down now and
>>>>> hopefully will be able to check in a fix sometime soon.
>>>>
>>>> Darn, I hate working on BBv1! Well, it's done.
>>>
>>> Thank you for addressing this! It's been an annoying problem.
>>>
>>>> We'll see how it works out tonight.
>>>
>>> Keeping our fingers crossed.
>>
>> So, the results are interesting. If you look at the Python tests, all
>> the white rectangles are gone except for one.
>
> Err, not quite. Quoting your origial post:
>
> David Abrahams writes:
>> Can anyone explain to me why in
>> http://engineering.meta-comm.com/boost-regression/CVS-HEAD/developer/python.html
>> the vc-6_5-stlport tests that fail show up as failures, but the msvc
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^
>> tests that fail show up as white rectangles?
>
> So we have at least one white rectangle in the place where before your
> changes process_jam_log was able to trace the dependency, and unknown
> status for the "msvc" toolset
Yipes! I hope things haven't become worse!
> (most likely because the Martin Slater's
> run was affected by the issue you've fixed earlier today).
It was yesterday, actually.
>> I think the cause of that one must be different from that of all the
>> others. Can you explain it?
>
> I'll try to take a deeper look at what's up here later tonight.
Thanks.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com