incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] release stdcxx 4.2.0 (candidate 7)
Date Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:23:07 GMT
Andrew Black wrote:
> I reviewed the README again, and I'm seeing a few nits, but I don't
> think they're worth holding the release up for (someone else may disagree).
> I feel the first paragraph of section 4.4 has a poorly worded or
> inaccurate description of where the rwtest library lives.

I'm not sure I see what you mean. Can you be more specific?

> I also wonder
> if the test harness needs to be better described, as it's referenced in
> several places, but not talked much about.

It probably should be. At the very least, we should document how
to run the tests. Usually, in other open source projects, it's
done by typing make test or make check. I don't think we support
either (I think we expect make run or some such).

> In section 5, it is claimed that the BUILDDIR argument is required, but
> this actually isn't the case, as the value will default to
> ${TOPDIR}/build .

Correct. Let me fix that.

> In section 5.1, no reference is made to the msvc-9.0
> and msvc-9.0-x64 config options.

Let me add them.

> Section 7 still references the old script in the final
> paragraph, which may need to be rewritten.  The paragraph before that
> includes some 'best results' instructions, which also were related to
> the old script.

I took it out.

Check out the changes here and let me know if you see anything
else that needs fixing:

> As far as test builds are concerned, I ran a couple tests.  Both builds
> were 11d.  The first was on my local machine (OpenSUSE 10.2 -
>, gcc version 4.1.2 20061115 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux))
> On this host, 27.stringbuf.xsputn.stdcxx-515.cpp test fails to compile.
>  This seems consistent with Redhat 5

Yep, I see it in our build logs. I created a Jira for it:

  (though without the failure to
> compile 22.locale.codecvt.out).

Interesting. I see the same result in our nightly builds on this
platform as everywhere else, so it looks like the error is somehow
specific to the way we build the tests in an automated way.

> Test suite summary is as follows:
>>   Programs:                187
>>   Non-zero exit status:      0
>>   Signalled:                11
>>   Compiler warnings:         0
>>   Linker warnings:           0
>>   Runtime warnings:         68
>>   Assertions:           11971783
>>   Failed assertions:      5341
> The second build was on HPUX 11.23, using HPaCC 3.73.  On this host, the
> 2.smartptr.shared.cpp,, and
> regress/27.stringbuf.xsputn.stdcxx-515.cpp tests failed to compile,
> consistent with nightly testing.

I filed the following two issues for these:


> Test suite summary is as follows:
>>   Programs:                187
>>   Non-zero exit status:      1
>>   Signalled:                 8
>>   Compiler warnings:         0
>>   Linker warnings:           0
>>   Runtime warnings:        222
>>   Assertions:           11528233
>>   Failed assertions:      4706
> My vote on rc-7 is +1, despite the issues with the README.
> --Andrew Black
> Martin Sebor wrote:
>> I just created the next stdcxx 4.2.0 release candidate tag,
>> stdcxx-4.2.0-rc-7, that incorporates changes addressing issues
>> pointed out in the original vote thread.
>> The tarball containing the release candidate sources can be
>> downloaded from my home directory at the following link:
>> The MD5 sum for the tarball is: b43adeb0c72cf4747301818f4dff4fa1
>> Instructions on unpacking the tarball, configuring and building
>> the library and the set of examples and tests, are in the README
>> file contained in the tarball and can also be viewed directly
>> in Subversion:
>> The Jira "Release Notes" for 4.2.0 detailing the issues resolved
>> in this release can be viewed here:
>> stdcxx 4.2.0 has been tested on the set of platforms listed in
>> the README. The test results for most of the tested platforms
>> can be be viewed on the following page:
>> (there are a few failures, most of them attributable to issues in
>> the Rogue Wave test infrastructure; a small number of failures are
>> due to known stdcxx issues).
>> Please download and test the tarball and vote to approve the
>> release and to request the approval of the Incubator PMC to publish
>> it on the stdcxx site. In your vote, please include the names and
>> versions of the compilers and operating systems that you tested on.
>> As always, everyone is encouraged to vote, including non-committers.
>> This vote will close in the usual 72 hours from now, i.e., on
>> Tuesday, 10/23 at 5:00 PM US/Mountain time. Follow the link
>> below for the countdown:

View raw message