Hi, I can see that almost all MinGW tests (jc-bell.com runner) for trunk are failing, at least for Boost.Log [1] and Boost.Atomic [2]. However, test logs don't show any errors, only compiler warnings. Does anyone know what is the problem? Also, this is not the first time when I see no errors in logs while the test is marked as failed. This is really unhelpful. Are some logs being lost by the test running suite? [1] http://www.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/log.html [2] http://www.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/atomic.html
I can see that almost all MinGW tests (jc-bell.com runner) for trunk are failing, at least for Boost.Log [1] and Boost.Atomic [2]. However, test logs don't show any errors, only compiler warnings. Does anyone know what is the problem?
Also, this is not the first time when I see no errors in logs while the test is marked as failed. This is really unhelpful. Are some logs being lost by the test running suite?
Proposed Boost.AFIO is also seeing segfaults on Mingw only (https://ci.nedprod.com/job/Boost.AFIO%20Test%20WinXP%20Mingw32/14/console). I had assumed it's the fault of the Mingw with GCC 4.7, because the Mingw with GCC 4.6 works fine. [I suspect Mingw with GCC 4.7 has been compiled with the frontend set to i686 but the backend set to i386. This causes substantial problems with any of the i486 ops e.g. anything atomic or locking. Mingw does point out the GCC 4.7 build is beta.]. There is an argument in favour of deprecating Mingw completely in favour of Mingw-w64, which is a ground up clean reimplementation. Niall --- Opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of BlackBerry Inc.
participants (2)
-
Andrey Semashev
-
Niall Douglas