[C++-sig] Re: Explicit failure markup

[Aleksey Gurtovoy]

Jonathan Brandmeyer writes:

> On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 19:45, David Abrahams wrote:
>> Jonathan Brandmeyer <jbrandmeyer at earthlink.net> writes:
>> 
>> > How are the expected failures communicated to the regression testing
>> > system?  I need to mark the slice test as failing on gcc-2.95.3-linux
>> > for the same reason that the other tests fail on this platform
>> > (exception translation).
>> 
>> See $BOOST_ROOT/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml
>
> I had seen this file, but the only reference that I can see for the
> python lib is (on CVS HEAD):
>
>     <!-- python -->
>     <library name="python">
>         <mark-unusable>
>             <toolset name="borland"/>
>             <toolset name="borland-5.5.1"/>
>             <toolset name="borland-5.6.4"/>
>             <note refid="2"/>
>             <note refid="17"/>
>         </mark-unusable>
>     </library>
>
> Where is the code that causes (for example) the args test to show up as
> an expected failure on gcc-2.95.3-linux?

Jonathan,

There are two sources for expected failures:

1) Explicit markup in "status/explicit-failures-markup.xml".

2) Failures from so-called reference or last-known-good release,
   checked into the Boost CVS under "libs/expected_results.xml". 
   Please see http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/104708 
   for the rationale.

The particular failures you are reffering to are coming from the
second source.

HTH,
-- 
Aleksey Gurtovoy
MetaCommunications Engineering