Re: [boost] [utility] operators_test/gcc-3.4.5/64 bit

From: Julio M. Merino Vidal (jmmv84_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-23 05:53:50

On 8/23/06, Martin Wille <mw8329_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Martin Wille wrote:
> > Daniel Frey wrote:
> >> Vladimir Prus wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> the above test fails with ICE:
> >>>
> >>>    http://tinyurl.com/pw2qu
> >>>
> >>> Is any maintainer willing to sumbit a bug report? In any case, can this
> >>> failure be marked as expected?
> >> Before marking it as expected, let's at least try to find a solution.
> >> I'd like to understand what exactly the problem is, whether there is a
> >> fix I could apply and what bug to file against the GCC. I just don't
> >> have a x86_64 system to test. Anyone?
> >
> > The problem could be that gcc runs out of memory here.
> >
> > I'll try with a higher limit.
>
>
> That didn't work, apparently. The problem isn't memory; apparently, the
> compiler runs into an infinite loop. The test got killed due to
> exceeding the limit on CPU time.
>
>
> Note that http://tinyurl.com/gqnd5 shows the same symptoms. Could this
> be caused by the same compiler bug?

And a similar problem appears while building Boost Wave under
NetBSD/amd64 with gcc 3.x.  We use the following hack during the build
to avoid the problem:

# GCC 3.3.3 enters an infinite loop under NetBSD/amd64 in Boost.Wave's
# insantiate_cpp_literalgrs.cpp source file.  Avoid compiling it.
# To make things simple, apply the hack to all the platforms so that the
# builds are consistent.
BJAM_BUILD+=    <define>BOOST_WAVE_SEPARATE_GRAMMAR_INSTANTIATION=0

-- 
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84_at_[hidden]>
The Julipedia - http://julipedia.blogspot.com/