Earlier today, I uploaded a fix a narrowing-conversion bug to boost::rational. (Ticket #5855, change-set [85418]) But I did another check-in first (change-set [85417]). The lower-numbered change represented a problem while fixing the ticket. C++11 adds two static members to std::numeric_limits. One of them, max_digits10, represents how many digits are needed to be printed to (near) guarantee text/binary conversion. Boost.Test uses it in its C++11 code, so it expects any version of numeric_limits to have it, which caused errors with Boost.Rational since that part of the test code hasn't been touched since it was written nearly 7 years ago! (There was a minor tweak over 5 years ago.) One advantage with Git is that I could have checked both changes separately. Here, for Subversion, I had to back out the second change, commit the first, then redo the second to get them recorded independently. I just did a quick look at our regression tests, and most of them involve one or both of the issues I just fixed. So can everyone do a test cycle sooner rather than later? (The "teeks99-08(e|f|g|h)-Ubnutu12.04-64" teams need to make sure Clang is installed and in the PATH.) Daryle W.