"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:4714E9C7.5070903@boost-consulting.com...

This is gcc-3.4 (cygwin).

In file included from C:\cygwin\home\ericne\boost\org\trunk\libs\test\src\execution_monitor.cpp:16: ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp: In function `void boost::detail::execution_monitor_jumping_signal_handler(int, siginfo_t*, void*)': ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected id-expression before "__extension__" ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected `;' before "__extension__" ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected primary-expression before ')' token ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected `;' before ')' token

Fixed in svn. Looks like cygwin can;t handle :: infront of siglongjmp. I ma having problems with Boost.Build and cygwin setup and can't test againt it easily.

I'm fully sync'ed up to svn head. We seem to be having a lot of problems with Boost.Test lately. This is really bad. Should we revert Boost.Test to something that works?

This change was commited last night. If by "lately" you mean last couple hours I believe it might worth waiting a bit ;) This was major update and some discrepensies may crop up here and there. I'll try to address it quickly. Gennadiy

Eric Niebler wrote:

This is gcc-3.4 (cygwin).

In file included from C:\cygwin\home\ericne\boost\org\trunk\libs\test\src\execution_monitor.cpp:16: ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp: In function `void boost::detail::execution_monitor_jumping_signal_handler(int, siginfo_t*, void*)': ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected id-expression before "__extension__" ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected `;' before "__extension__" ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected primary-expression before ')' token ../../boost/test/impl/execution_monitor.ipp:635: error: expected `;' before ')' token

I'm fully sync'ed up to svn head. We seem to be having a lot of problems with Boost.Test lately. This is really bad. Should we revert Boost.Test to something that works?

Yes. This is a disaster. Can you do the revert? I'm tied up. It looks like a series of changes where make on revisions 40065-40078, and then 40090. Thanks, --Beman