On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:01:01 -0500, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote
A clarification for developers monitoring regression reports: a significant number of Linux regressions showing up in the current reports
So 'regressions' against 1.31 now show up as 'red' boxes?
(http://www.meta-comm.com/engineering/boost- regression/developer/summary.html) is NOT a result of some recent checkin. Most of these failures were there for some time, but weren't highlighted as regressions because the report generation tools didn't have the data for this platform to compare against. This was fixed yesterday.
Some of the date-time failures with gcc2.95 appear to be a runtime configuration issue: Run output []: ../bin/boost/libs/date_time/test/testconstrained_value.test/gcc-2.95.3-stlport-4.5.3-linux/debug/testconstrained_value: error while loading shared libraries: libstdc++-libc6.3-2.so.3: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory Martin, any ideas why many of the tests can pass and some can fail? Only difference I see is that the failing tests are low-level template tests that do not link boost date-time while the passing tests all link the library. As for Intel, it looks like there's a couple tests I need to mark as failing... Jeff