Re: [boost] Regressions in your Boost libraries as of 2005-06-30
Douglas Gregor <dgregor@cs.indiana.edu> writes:
You are receiving this report because one or more of the libraries you maintain has regression test failures that are not accounted for. A full version of the report is sent to the Boost developer's mailing list.
What's going on here? Is intel-win32-8_1 a new platform? A couple of days ago I only had a few gcc-3.3.6-linux regressions to deal with.
There are failures in these libraries you maintain: iterator (2) python (56)
|iterator| filter_iterator_test: intel-win32-8_1 lvalue_concept_fail: intel-win32-8_1
|python| andreas_beyer: intel-win32-8_1 args: intel-win32-8_1
<snip> -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
On Jun 30, 2005, at 9:26 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
Douglas Gregor <dgregor@cs.indiana.edu> writes:
You are receiving this report because one or more of the libraries you maintain has regression test failures that are not accounted for. A full version of the report is sent to the Boost developer's mailing list.
What's going on here? Is intel-win32-8_1 a new platform? A couple of days ago I only had a few gcc-3.3.6-linux regressions to deal with.
It looks like the "pjb" tests might be using an older revision of Intel 8.1 that's causing the trouble... I CC'd Paul in reply to Peter's message about bind (which is running into a similar problem). We'll try to get it cleaned up, but if we can't I can rein in the auto-complainer until we get it handled. Spurious errors are worse than no errors :( Doug
It looks like the "pjb" tests might be using an older revision of Intel 8.1 that's causing the trouble... I CC'd Paul in reply to Peter's message about bind (which is running into a similar problem). We'll try to get it cleaned up, but if we can't I can rein in the auto-complainer until we get it handled. Spurious errors are worse than no errors :(
Certainly its older in that it is a shameful :) 3 weeks out of date. v8.1.028 rather than latest which has recently had another bump. I will rectify when I have a moment. Could the problem be I'm running a release build rather than a debug one as noted in my comments.html file Anyone else run it in release to confirm/deny. I won't be able to update now till Wednesday as my Intel login password is at work and I'm not back till then. (I just tried and failed to remember my password) Sorry for any delay in my help. In the meantime I'll run a debug build with v8.1.028 tonight to see if I duplicate other people's results and give back the (false?) sense of security. I did notice that I had PYTHON_VERSION set to 2.3 when in fact I'm running v2.4.1 I've modified that before running again. Personally I think release build has more meaning for regressions but it does have more chance of exposing compiler optimisation bugs rather than boost ones.... Paul
participants (3)
-
David Abrahams -
Douglas Gregor -
Paul Baxter