From: K. Noel Belcourt (kbelco_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-28 14:31:22
On Dec 28, 2007, at 4:05 AM, John Maddock wrote:
> K. Noel Belcourt wrote:
>> Where the "terminate called recursively" is repeated approximately
>> 570e6 times.
>> [kbelco_at_sahp7645 results]$ ls -l /var/scratch2/boost/results/boost/
>> -rw-rw-r-- 1 kbelco kbelco 572424926 Dec 27 04:58 /var/scratch2/
>> This is causing process_jam_log to fail to process the intel-10.0
>> results, resulting in a hang. Any idea why this test is failing
>> under intel-10.0 while it appears to pass okay under 8.1, 9.0 and
> I tried this on my Linux box with both Intel-10.0 and Intel-10.1
> and see
> similar behaviour in each case: the program hangs (actually it
> according to gdb) as soon as it attempts to throw an exception from
> the library.
> However, I'm using this compiler on an unsupported Linux
> configuration, so
> problems like this aren't necessarily unexpected :-(
> So... is the system you're running on supported officially by Intel?
From what I can tell, yes. The only issue I see is that Intel's web
site recommends using libstdc++.so.5 and we have both libstdc++.so
versions 5.0.7 and 6.0.3. I suppose it could be an issue with using
> Also like you I have no issues with earlier Intel compiler releases
> on this
> machine, so I'm not sure what if anything I can do to fix this :-(
> Just an idea: but can you try building that test with link=static
> and see if
> that helps at all? Just in case it's a passing exceptions across .so
> boundaries problem?
With link=static, I reran the entire set of intel-linux-10 tests.
The tests ran to completion and the regex_regress test passed. I'll
start posting intel-linux-10.0 results for the trunk with link=static.
Thanks for the help.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk