From dev-return-7209-apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive=stdcxx.apache.org@stdcxx.apache.org Tue Apr 01 21:08:15 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 27106 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2008 21:08:15 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Apr 2008 21:08:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 69509 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2008 21:08:14 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 69494 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2008 21:08:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@stdcxx.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 69485 invoked by uid 99); 1 Apr 2008 21:08:14 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 14:08:14 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.30.140.160] (HELO moroha.roguewave.com) (208.30.140.160) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:07:25 +0000 Received: from exchmail01.Blue.Roguewave.Com (exchmail01.blue.roguewave.com [10.22.129.22]) by moroha.roguewave.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m31L7j5w011317 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 21:07:45 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: failing regression tests Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 15:08:00 -0600 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: failing regression tests Thread-Index: AciUOHT0spu229+WThiInJKmOwGeTwAA5ZgA References: <47ED5834.4030803@roguewave.com> <7BDB2168BEAEF14C98F1901FD2DE643801EA9050@epmsa009.minsk.epam.com> <47F29D22.5060801@roguewave.com> From: "Travis Vitek" To: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org =20 >Martin Sebor wrote: > >Farid Zaripov wrote: >>> >>>Martin Sebor wrote: >>> >>> The regression tests below are all failing with SIGABRT. >>> I check the issues and they have all been deferred, so what's=20 >>> missing is an entry for each of these tests in xfail.txt to=20 >>> mark them up on our build result pages. >>> >>> 21.string.assign.stdcxx-629 >>> 21.string.insert.stdcxx-630 >>> 21.string.insert.stdcxx-632 >>> 21.string.replace.stdcxx-170 >>> >>> Farid, I think these are all your issues. Can you please take=20 >>> care of updating xfail.txt when you have a chance? >>=20 >> Done. It seems that the 21.string.insert.stdcxx-630 test=20 >> is added by my mistake (the STDCXX-630 issue is about assign >> string method and not about insert). So I deleted this test >> from trunk. > >I think we need to decide if trunk is supposed to be a copy of >4.2.x or if it's for development of future versions. If the >latter, there's no problem with keeping tests like it there >as long as they're passing or as long as there's an entry in >xfail.txt. We just need to remember not to merge them (and >fixes for them, if they're incompatible) out to 4.2.x. > >So, which is it? Do we keep trunk as a development version of >4.2.x or do we make changes on it that are incompatible with >4.2.x? > I'm thinking that all work for 4.2.1 should be done on the 4.2.x branch, and future work should be done on trunk until an appropriate branch has been created. That way we avoid having to be careful about bulk merges from trunk to 4.2.1... Everything that is on 4.2.x should be safe for trunk. Unfortunately, I think that would mean that we would need to do nightly testing on the 4.2.x branch, possibly in addition to trunk. >Martin >