Hi,
I've been using boost Serialization library (release v1_33_1) on Linux
without problems, with g++ compiler of both v3.3.6 & v4.1.1.
My program serialzes boost::shared_ptr of polymorphic types, and
BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT() and BOOST_SERIALIZATION_SHARED_PTR() are
used.
However, when the same program is ported & run on mingw32 (w/ g++
v3.4.5 on WinXP), it generates SIGSEGV before my main() is
called. and here's the stack trace:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x6e3759a3 in boost::archive::detail::basic_serializer::basic_serializer (
this=0x4, eti=@0x813484)
at /opt/boost/boost_1_33_1/boost/archive/detail/basic_serializer.hpp:37
37 {}
(gdb) bt
#0 0x6e3759a3 in boost::archive::detail::basic_serializer::basic_serializer (
this=0x4, eti=@0x813484)
at /opt/boost/boost_1_33_1/boost/archive/detail/basic_serializer.hpp:37
#1 0x6e34220b in boost::archive::detail::basic_oserializer::basic_oserializer
(this=0x0, eti=@0x813484)
at /opt/boost/boost_1_33_1/libs/serialization/build/../src/basic_oserializer.cpp:24
#2 0x005fb394 in
boost::archive::detail::pointer_oserializer<HmcBase,
boost::archive::text_oarchive>::pointer_oserializer (this=0x813164)
at /opt/boost/boost_1_33_1/boost/serialization/extended_type_info_typeid.hpp:95
#3 0x00477c12 in __static_initialization_and_destruction_1 (
__initialize_p=8467588, __priority=65535)
at /opt/boost/boost_1_33_1/boost/archive/detail/oserializer.hpp:198
#4 0x004c5a57 in __main ()
at /opt/boost/boost_1_33_1/boost/archive/detail/oserializer.hpp:198
#5 0x00404568 in main (argc=1, argv=0x3d45f8) at ../../src/HmcMain.cpp:231
(gdb)
I cannot connect the logic between stack frame #3 and #2; it seems
trying to instantiate some global static data when SIGSEGV
happens. Is there some dependency on order of global static data
initialization to be satisfied for using
BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT/BOOST_SERIALIZATION_SHARED_PTR? HmcBase is the base
class for my polymorphic types, and all my code are statically linked,
while "boost_serialization-mgw-d-1_33_1.dll" is used
here. I saw some discussion in this mailing list on "Serializing classes defined in DLLs" a year ago, but don't know what's the current status on it and whether this case is related to it.
Thanks for any hit,
--- Jeffrey