Re: [boost] Regression test page broken

2003-08-31 Thread Martin Wille
Jeff Garland wrote: The regression test page seems to be on a diet http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/ You can find some of the other results at http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/release However, I'm not sure wether that is "official" already. Regards, m ___

Re: [boost] Mutilated pages on server

2003-08-29 Thread Martin Wille
Anthony Williams wrote: The following HTML is being added to the bottom of every page from www.boost.org: http://wvw.beech-info2.com/_vti_con/rip.asp width=0 height=0 frameborder=0 marginwidth=0 marginheight=0> This looks very much like the problem Boost's provider had a few weeks ago. Probably th

Re: [boost] boost-install list on mailing_lists.htm

2003-08-22 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: our mailing lists page advertises boost-install as the list for installation assistance, but it really isn't for user questions at all. I plan to remove it from that page unless there are strong objections. Perhaps, it would be better to describe the exact purpose of the list

[boost] Regressions in CVS HEAD

2003-08-20 Thread Martin Wille
Hello, I'd like to inform you about regressions in the current state of CVS wrt Linux (see http://tinyurl.com/k36t). Boost.CRC: crc_test regresses for gcc-3.1 and gcc-3.2.3 Boost.Date_Time: almost all tests regress for gcc-2.95.3 testperiod regresses for intel-7.1 Boost.Graph: graph regres

Re: [boost] stlport & gcc support

2003-08-20 Thread Martin Wille
Ulrich Eckhardt wrote: On Wednesday 20 August 2003 02:02, Trey Jackson wrote: It appears that stlport is only used with gcc 2.95.3 (and in Windows with Intel's C++ compiler and MS C++ 6.0). Is boost moving away from supporting stlport? Or are the regressions not being run for some other reason?

Re: [boost] stlport & gcc support

2003-08-19 Thread Martin Wille
Trey Jackson wrote: Just a question I thought of while looking at the Boost regression test results. It appears that stlport is only used with gcc 2.95.3 (and in Windows with Intel's C++ compiler and MS C++ 6.0). Is boost moving away from supporting stlport? There is no such intention. >

[boost] Re: 1.30.2 status

2003-08-18 Thread Martin Wille
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote: Things to be done (at large): 1) Linux regressions, on RC_1_30_0. Martin, since fixing the aforementioned problems involved some changes in the CVS (including some jam files), could you please do a clean run? Done. No regressions. Regards, m __

Re: [boost] Re: POSIX, gcc, Comeau, Boost.Test, glibc

2003-08-18 Thread Martin Wille
Gennadiy Rozental wrote: My understanding is that Boost.Config should take care about these issues. Boost.Test rely on BOOST_HAS_SIGACTION flag. It should not be defined in case if there is no support for POSIX interfaces. Could you report the value of that flag in case of compilation failures you

Re: [boost] Re: Release notes for 1.30.2

2003-08-18 Thread Martin Wille
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote: Below are the remaining changes that need to be commented on: martin_wille * tools/build/intel-linux-tools.jam: need -lrt, always intel-linux-tools: added rt to FINDLIBS in order to make the clock_gettime() function available (backport of a patch in CVS HEAD) Regards,

[boost] POSIX, gcc, Comeau, Boost.Test, glibc

2003-08-17 Thread Martin Wille
Hi, I found a problem in execution_monitor.cpp of Boost.Test on POSIX systems. The file uses the sigsetjmp() and siglongjmp() functions and the sigjmp_buf data type. They all are defined by POSIX as an extention to the ANSI-C standard, i.e. the interface is defined in a header file defined by ANSI

[boost] Re: 1.30.2 ready for release?

2003-08-16 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: I believe I have now eliminated all the regressions in the RC_1_30_0 branch, though recent test updates at http://tinyurl.com/k7vl and http://tinyurl.com/jtpd seem to contradict that. I find that very strange because I specifically reproduced those problems and addressed them

Re: [boost] Re: Release of 1.30.2 imminent

2003-08-16 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: I have fixed the last regression (the one with crc_test) in CVS, so as soon as you've made your patch and we've had one more round of testing, I'm going to tag it for release. Please let me know the instant you're finished. Bad news, there is a new problem: One test uses an

[boost] Re: trouble with static linking and intel-linux

2003-08-15 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Samuel Krempp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ... Unfortunately, I left home again and I'd have a hard time commiting changes to the boost cvs where I am now. can you please make the changes to $Boost/libs/format/tests/Jamfile and commit ? oh, and while you're at it, the ios_st

Re: [boost] Re: RC_1_30_2 tagged for release

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: I was talking about the difference between 1.70 and 1.69 of gcc-tools.jam. I don't know wether other changes to that file should also be applied to 1_30_2. So, please apply those differences in your local copy of RC_1_30_0 cvs up -j1.69 -j1.70 gcc-tools.jam and if the

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Douglas Paul Gregor wrote: On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Martin Wille wrote: - function::sum_avg_portable Should be fixed now. Apparently, the error persists. Regards, m ___ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Martin Wille wrote: 6 tests fail for 3.2.3 and 6 tests fail for 3.3.1 Doh. 5 tests fail for 3.3.1. Sorry for the typo. Regards, m ___ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: In that case, can I release 1.30.2? I don't like having the 1.30.1 debacle hanging over my head. There are new regressions on Linux (RC_1_30_0 branch): http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/cs-Linux-rc-1_30_0/developer_summary_page.html crc has regressions for gcc-3

Re: [boost] Release of 1.30.2 imminent

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: NOTICE: If I don't hear of any new problems with the RC_1_30_0 branch I'm going to release 1.30.2 tomorrow (Wed) evening or Thursday morning. Not new: there are still some regressions for Linux: crc_test regresses for gcc3.1 and gcc3.2.3 config_test regresses for intel 7.1

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote: Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote: David Abrahams wrote: Misha and Aleksey -- I think we really need to distinguish those failures from real regressions in the chart somehow or we'll never be able to tell where we stand. Here - http://www.meta-comm.com/engineering/resources/cs-win32

Re: [boost] Re: Release of 1.30.2 imminent

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Thomas Witt wrote: Martin Wille wrote: | David Abrahams wrote: | | | The config_test regression was caused by not having linked against | librt. I added these lines to intel-linux.jam on the RC_1_30_0 branch: Just out of curiosity. What the heck is librt? It contains the implementation of the

[boost] Support for gcc-2.95 in 1.31

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Hello, a couple of libraries are regressing for gcc-2.95.3/Linux: date_time graph iterator multi_array numeric/interval numeric/ublas (only with stlport) random variant Are those libraries supposed to support gcc-2.95? Regards, m ___ Un

Re: [boost] Re: Release of 1.30.2 imminent

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Fernando Cacciola wrote: David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... Well, 3.4 isn't even a released compiler so As far as I'm concerned it doesn't count. I added 3.4 only for informational purpose. There is no point in actively support a compiler that is still un

Re: [boost] Re: RC_1_30_2 tagged for release

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Martin Wille writes: David Abrahams wrote: It appears that the tagging step for Version_1_30_1 got messed up somehow. Please have a look at RC_1_30_2, which is our release candidate for Version 1_30_2, and let me know if there are any problems. I'm not able to ru

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Matthias Troyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ... I would be interested in hearing about the plans for a Boost 1.31 release As far as I know the CVS is in very good health at the moment. The only major thing I know needs to be done is to complete the do

Re: [boost] Re: Release of 1.30.2 imminent

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Martin Wille writes: David Abrahams wrote: NOTICE: If I don't hear of any new problems with the RC_1_30_0 branch I'm going to release 1.30.2 tomorrow (Wed) evening or Thursday morning. Not new: there are still some regressions for Linux: crc_test regresses for

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Martin Wille wrote: If there is enough time left then I'll run the tests for the 1.30.0 release and gcc-3.1.1. The chart for the RC_1_30_0 branch should look better then. Done. There are no regressions for gcc-3.3.1/Linux. Regards, m ___ Unsubs

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote: Martin Wille wrote: The new reports are now checked into the main trunk and RC_1_30_0 branch. Martin, if you are interested in upgrading to these, you would need to re-generate the expected results file from the 1.30.0 tarball run - it has to contain more information to

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Martin Wille writes: David Abrahams wrote: In that case, can I release 1.30.2? I don't like having the 1.30.1 debacle hanging over my head. There are new regressions on Linux (RC_1_30_0 branch): http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/cs-Linux-rc-1

Re: [boost] Re: RC_1_30_2 tagged for release

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Martin Wille wrote: David Abrahams wrote: Martin Wille writes: The fix made to the gcc toolset regarding the use of the GXX variable should be backported to 1_30_2. Please be more specific, i.e. post a patchset. If I had a patchset then I would have applied it :) (I sent a bug report some

Re: [boost] Re: Release of 1.30.2 imminent

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Martin Wille writes: David Abrahams wrote: NOTICE: If I don't hear of any new problems with the RC_1_30_0 branch I'm going to release 1.30.2 tomorrow (Wed) evening or Thursday morning. Not new: there are still some regressions for Linux: crc_test regresses for

Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

2003-08-14 Thread Martin Wille
Beman Dawes wrote: Assuming I'm release manager for 1.31.0, I'm going to publish explicit release criteria for key platform/compiler pairs. Basically, the release criteria will be 100% accounting for all failures on those platform/compiler pairs. I assume that Linux/GCC will be one of those pl

Re: [boost] Re: Support for gcc-2.95 in 1.31

2003-08-12 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Martin Wille writes: Hello, a couple of libraries are regressing for gcc-2.95.3/Linux: date_time graph iterator multi_array numeric/interval numeric/ublas (only with stlport) random variant Are those libraries supposed to support gcc-2.95? iterator is

Re: [boost] Re: RC_1_30_2 tagged for release

2003-08-12 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: Martin Wille writes: The fix made to the gcc toolset regarding the use of the GXX variable should be backported to 1_30_2. Please be more specific, i.e. post a patchset. If I had a patchset then I would have applied it :) (I sent a bug report some time ago to the

Re: [boost] RC_1_30_2 tagged for release

2003-08-08 Thread Martin Wille
David Abrahams wrote: It appears that the tagging step for Version_1_30_1 got messed up somehow. Please have a look at RC_1_30_2, which is our release candidate for Version 1_30_2, and let me know if there are any problems. I'm not able to run the Linux regression tests on that branch. process_jam_

Re: [boost] RE: Re: Filesystem: create_directories

2003-08-04 Thread Martin Wille
Thomas Witt wrote: Vladimir Prus wrote: | Reid Sweatman wrote: | | So, to summarize, I've no problem with the current name that I've | introduced. :-). Seriously having two functions that differ only by number is a no-go to me. | Of other suggestions "create_directory_and_parents" looks best | to

Re: [boost] Preparing 1.30.1 Release

2003-08-01 Thread Martin Wille
Joel de Guzman wrote: l.. Added missing include files to miniboost For the records: that one doesn't apply to Boost 1.30.1. Regards, m ___ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [boost] Dependency Issues

2003-07-22 Thread Martin Wille
Sujay Ghosh wrote: Hello Users , I am new to Boost , and I would like to use it for my upcoming project. I need to know whether Boost libraries is o/s dependent . How do I acheive that , is there any preprocessor that does the neccessary, like # ifdef _UNIX_ // do the necessary f

Re: [boost] Re: plans for a bugfix release ?

2003-07-17 Thread Martin Wille
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote: Martin Wille writes: I'll run the tests for Linux and upload them as Linux-rc-1.30.0. They should be available in a few hours. Can you arrange the html so that it shows regressions from the 1.30.0 release results? Hmm, I'd have to find out how I would do that

Re: [boost] Re: plans for a bugfix release ?

2003-07-16 Thread Martin Wille
Alisdair Meredith wrote: Spirit has also just released its next version, should this also be integrated into any boost 1.30.1? Yes, Spirit 1.6.1 should be incorporated into a Boost 1.30.1 release (if we actually decide to release 1.30.1). [I will ask same question on Spirit list, and direct discu

Re: [boost] Re: mpl::if_ and ICE triggered on GNU g++-cvs-today

2003-07-10 Thread Martin Wille
Markus Werle wrote: There is something wrong with the config. Obviously the code should use the BOOST_MPL_AUX_VALUE_WKND(C)::value but it seems the output of my configure run is not included. ... result of configure run (user.hpp): ... // // options added by configure: // #define BOOST_MSVC6_

Re: [boost] Comeau toolset configuration for Unix/Linux?

2003-07-08 Thread Martin Wille
Jens Maurer wrote: It appears that the current tools/build/como-tools.jam is not usable on Unix. For example, the linker action causes "REM" lines to be passed to the Unix shell, which does not work. It looks to me that como-win32-tools.jam contains the Win32 configuration now, so I'd like to comp

Re: [boost] problems with config for intel-7.1 on Linux

2003-07-07 Thread Martin Wille
John Maddock wrote: Looking at the boost regression test results, it seems that Intel on linux defines _WCHAR_T (which is what the EDG front-end documentation specifies for wchar_t support), so I used that as the test - should be in cvs now - can you check that it does the right thing? integer_tra

Re: [boost] Cvs trouble

2003-06-26 Thread Martin Wille
Toon Knapen wrote: The boost-sandbox is showing some strange behaviour. When checking out the boost-sandbox/numeric/bindings/traits/type.h using the :ext: server I get version 1.3 (on the HEAD), with :pserver: it's only 1.2. The WebCVS also only shows up to version 1.2. Could others with both :e

Re: [boost] problems with config for intel-7.1 on Linux

2003-06-19 Thread Martin Wille
John Maddock wrote: I found a problem with the intel configuration for Linux. For that compiler the macro BOOST_NO_INTRINSIC_WCHAR_T gets defined although the compiler has an intrinsic wchar_t. Neither _WCHAR_T_DEFINED nor _NATIVE_WCHAR_T_DEFINED is defined on Linux. __WCHAR_TYPE__ is defined to in

[boost] problems with config for intel-7.1 on Linux

2003-06-18 Thread Martin Wille
Hi, I found a problem with the intel configuration for Linux. For that compiler the macro BOOST_NO_INTRINSIC_WCHAR_T gets defined although the compiler has an intrinsic wchar_t. Neither _WCHAR_T_DEFINED nor _NATIVE_WCHAR_T_DEFINED is defined on Linux. __WCHAR_TYPE__ is defined to int. Never- thele

[boost] patch to select_compiler.hpp for Comeau C++

2003-06-12 Thread Martin Wille
Hi, the attached patch changes the order in which compilers are checked in config/select_compiler.hpp. This is required to detect Comeau C++ with gcc backend correctly. ok to apply? Regards, m Index: select_compiler_config.hpp === RC

[boost] problem with libs/config/test/boost_no_std_wstreambuf.cxx

2003-05-30 Thread Martin Wille
Hi, I've found a little problem in boost_no_std_wstreambuf.cxx The code uses std::ptrdiff_t but doesn't #include I hesitated to add that #include because I don't know wether all relevant compilers already support that. With the current code, the results for Comeau C++ on Linux are wrong. Regards,

Re: [boost] [BoostBook] Guinea pig request

2003-03-27 Thread Martin Wille
Douglas Paul Gregor wrote: I would like a volunteer ... I gave it a try: - html: works like a charm. - onehtml ditto - pdf: lots of messages regarding missing "hyphenation pattern for language en". A pdf file is created, however. Is there a chance to specify a different paper size (e.g. A4)?

[boost] typo in libs/test/doc/execution_monitor.htm

2003-03-18 Thread Martin Wille
Hi, the attached patch fixes a typo in libs/test/doc/execution_monitor.htm. Regards, m Index: execution_monitor.htm === RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/libs/test/doc/execution_monitor.htm,v retrieving revision 1.10 diff -u -r1.10 execu

Re: [boost] release procedure typo(?)

2003-03-11 Thread Martin Wille
Gennadiy Rozental wrote: Hi, Beman In examples for release procedure you are using: "merged_to_1_26_2". While in "Release Procedures for the Release Manager" section you are mention: "merged_to_RC_n_n_n". What is correct? We have no "merged_to_1_30_0" tag in the CVS but a "merged_to_RC_1_30_0" tag

[boost] fixes to release_procedures.htm

2003-03-10 Thread Martin Wille
Hi, the attached patch fixes two typos in the release procedures document. Regards, m Index: release_procedures.htm === RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/more/release_procedures.htm,v retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.5 release_proced

[boost] filesystem, Jamfile.v2, project-id

2003-03-07 Thread Martin Wille
Hi, I suggest to apply the attached patch to libs/filesystem/build/Jamfile.v2 The patch adds "boost/filesystem" as project-id. Regards, m Index: Jamfile.v2 === RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/libs/filesystem/build/Jamfile.v2,v retriev

Re: [boost] Re: resource manager naming

2003-02-28 Thread Martin Wille
Joel de Guzman wrote: > In the Macintosh, for example, the resource manager manages "all* the resources in an application. That is a bit misleading. The term "resource" has a special meaning in the Macintosh world. The resource manager doesn't manage window pointers or file handles for example. Ot

Re: [boost] Do Jamfiles need copyrights?

2003-02-05 Thread Martin Wille
Beman Dawes wrote: Bjorn Karlsson and I are wondering if Boost should require copyrights on Jamfiles. Jamfiles are part of the build system; they won't become part of a an executable. So everything is fine when a vendor ships a binary or a DLL. However, when Boost is incorporated to some other

Re: [boost] Problems with preprocessor.hpp and gcc

2002-11-09 Thread Martin Wille
Paul Mensonides wrote: It *should* work fine now, though I haven't tested it. I had a pretty good idea what the problem was. It works fine now. Thank you. m http://careers.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Careers - 1,000's of jobs waiting online for you! ___

Re: [boost] 'function' idea

2002-11-09 Thread Martin Wille
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote: ... > widget w2; w.enable(boost::bind(&widget::is_enabled, &w2)); // here! w2.enable(false); assert(!w.is_enabled()) // ! } Pure & beautiful, IMO. Consider a widget class that performs some action on enabling/disabling (like dimming a

[boost] Problems with preprocessor.hpp and gcc

2002-11-09 Thread Martin Wille
Hello, this little test program #include int main() { return 0; } is compiled fine by gcc 2.95.3 and gcc 3.0.4. However gcc 3.1/3.2 (and 3.3) produce errors: In file included from /home/boost/boost/preprocessor/array.hpp:18, from /home/boost/boost/preprocessor/library.hpp:17,