stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Black <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] release stdcxx 4.2.0 (candidate 7)
Date Tue, 23 Oct 2007 20:47:07 GMT
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 also wonder
if the test harness needs to be better described, as it's referenced in
several places, but not talked much about.

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

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.

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

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.

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