Subject: Re: [boost] Issues with intel's compiler and newer builds of GCC
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-20 04:37:01
> While working on getting icc to not choke on Serialization (the Boost test
> indicated that icc was failing to build with the addition of my changes),
> I came
> across a very nasty bug the occurs when using icc with version 4.5 or
> higher of
> GNU's standard library - GNU's <iomanip> uses what are either illegal or
> semantics which icc doesn't support. Serialization uses <iomanip>, and icc
> to select the latest version of libstd++ installed on a Linux machine as
> default standard library (I have been unable to find an Intel standard
> library -
> I'm assuming such a thing doesn't exist).
> When using an older version of libstd++, icc + Serialization compiled
> fine. I
> removed all uses of IO parameterized manipulators in Serialization (there
> only maybe half a dozen cases)*, and got icc to compile Serialization with
> libstd++ v4.5.
Oh, Intel's compiler isn't supported with gcc-4.5, period. Basically you
shouldn't use it with anything except 4.4 or lower - there should be an
installation option to control which gcc version gets picked up, but it's
such a while since I had to do that I can't remember how it all works :-(
> Is there any chance the linux/darwin Intel build bots can be set up to use
> v4.4, if they're not already using it? Intel is apparently aware of this
> but it won't be fixed until their next major release
You can always find out what compiler and library versions are in use by
going to the Boost.Config test results and clicking on the config_info
results for the test runner you're interested in, for example:
http://tinyurl.com/2ujk8td indicates that Darwin Intel-11.1 is on top of gcc
> If the build bots aren't using v4.5 of GNU's standard library, then I'm at
> a loss
> as to why Serialization is failing to build on them. My only other thought
> is that
> the timeout for the build cycle is too low - the failures indicate that
> the error
> is a timeout after 300 seconds.
I see what you mean... not very helpful!
The best you can do is contact the test runner for more info.
As a general note, the Intel-Darwin tests seem to have more than their fair
share of unexpected/unexplained failures, I can only assume that Intel's
support for Darwin is a lot less mature than for Windows/Linux.
> On a more general note, is Intel on Linux/Darwin a "supported" Boost
Issue with core "supported" compiles are shown on the issues page:
are no Intel-Darwin failures there, just the VC7.1 ones.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk