Boost logo

Boost Testing :

From: Boris Gubenko (Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-08 09:39:59

From: Thomas Witt <witt_at_[hidden]>
> Let me clarify this. I am perfectly willing to accept acc patches
> for 1.34. That is as long they don't break anything else.
Thanks. I'll submit a patch for the boost.filesystem library which
works around a bug in <sys/statvfs.h> header on HP-UX.

> [...] a required platform [...] basically means that
> the library authors have to explicitly deal with failures on that
> platform by marking them as expected.
We started to analyze tests results to see if the failure is because
of missing conditionalization for HP-UX in the boost code, a compiler/
library bug, wrong compilation switches, ... etc. It will take some
time to sort it out and, then, we'll know which tests should be made
expected failures on HP-UX.

There are low-hanging fruits though: for example, date_time library
tests testfacet[_dll] fail on HP-UX for exactly same reason they fail
on Tru64: because of the bug in the Rogue Wave library. They are marked
as expected failures on Tru64 and should be marked as such on HP-UX as
well. I'd like to modify explicit-failures-markup.xml accordingly in
both CVS HEAD and RC, but I don't have write access to CVS. So, how do
I do it? Submit a patch for .xml file?


Boost-testing list run by mbergal at