Update of /cvsroot/boost/boost/status
In directory sc8-pr-cvs3.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv27050

Modified Files:
        explicit-failures-markup.xml 
Log Message:
Update for new Borland failure

Index: explicit-failures-markup.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.550
retrieving revision 1.551
diff -u -d -r1.550 -r1.551
--- explicit-failures-markup.xml        16 Mar 2007 04:30:51 -0000      1.550
+++ explicit-failures-markup.xml        29 Mar 2007 16:28:01 -0000      1.551
@@ -922,7 +922,21 @@
             <toolset name="intel-7.1-linux"/>
                 <note author="B. Garst" refid="22"/>
             </mark-failure>
-          </test>
+        </test>
+        <test name="testmicrosec_time_clock">
+            <mark-failure>
+            <toolset name="borland-5.6.4"/>
+            <toolset name="borland-5.8.2"/>
+            <note author="J. Garland">
+               There is apparently a bug in Borland library
+               such that  std::local_time and std::gmtime are 
+               returning a time that's 1 hour ahead GetSystemTimeAsFileTime 
+               during DST.  This is a rather serious problem in that 
+               some of the date-time clock interfaces will give the wrong
+               current time.
+            </note>
+            </mark-failure>
+        </test>
         <test name="teststreams">
             <mark-failure>
                 <toolset name="gcc-2.95.3-linux"/>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Boost-cvs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-cvs

Reply via email to