From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-03 03:03:05
Martin Wille wrote:
> Recently a problem came up with program_options/cmdline_test_dll.
> Several times, my computer crashed and I haven't been able to figure
> out the reason for it. Today, I was lucky to see that test eating up
> all the memory and CPU. So it looks like it ran into an infinite loop.
> This for several times has been an indicator for something going
> wrong with the signal handling in Boost.Test; this time, it also looks
> like Boost.Test is the culprit; strace shows output similar to the
> other cases:
> --- SIGABRT (Aborted) @ 0 (0) ---
> rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, [RTMIN], NULL, 8) = 0
> rt_sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, [ABRT], NULL, 8) = 0
> kill(21453, SIGABRT) = 0
Hmm.... the test worked OK for me! I'm really interested to figure out where
the SIGABRT comes from: maybe some assert fires.
> This type of failure is a showstopper for testing. I suggest to
> disable the sigaction based signal handling in Boost.Test at
> least for gcc 2 and for como. Perhaps, other compilers are also
You mean the problems is only on those two toolsets? Yes, I think disabling
signal handling in Boost.Test to see where the test fails would be very
desired. BTW, you mention como, but I don't see that toolset in linux
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk