Vladimir Prus wrote:
(2) applies to graph and thread libraries. I've verified that the mentioned tests exist on RC; if the library authors believe those changes should not be on RC, just say. + <mark-expected-failures> + <test name="test_barrier_lib"/> + <toolset name="msvc-8.0"/> + <note author="Aleksey Gurtovoy" refid="6"/> + </mark-expected-failures> + + <mark-expected-failures> + <test name="test_thread"/> + <toolset name="msvc-7.1"/> + <note author="Aleksey Gurtovoy" refid="6"/> + </mark-expected-failures>
<mark-expected-failures reason="?"> <test name="*_lib"/>
The markup for thread were correct on RC_. Don't know what these on HEAD are. For Boost.Thread we currently do have the unfortunate situation that the "real" development is not on HEAD but on thread_rewrite branch. (I know this is odd, but this is how things are at the moment.) This branch also does not cover the entire tree, but only the thread subdirectories. We (Anthony and me) are planning to move the thread_rewrite to SVN trunk after the release to not introduce even more ambiguities before the 1.34 release. David told me that the plan after 1.34 release is to make the current RC_1_34_0 branch the HEAD branch on upcoming SVN. The HEAD branch for Boost.Thread currently is kind of "orphaned" and given the above I cannot see much sense maintaining it. In case of differences between HEAD and RC_1_34_0 currently it is safer to leave RC_1_34_0 as is and forward differences to HEAD. Thank you, Roland