- Boost - lists.boost.org

[process] Process.Spawn leaves the child in zombie state on posix
by Benedek Tass 08 Jul '22

08 Jul '22

Hi, everyone! This bug was observed in 2022.07.05, using boost version 1.79.0. Similar behaviour was commented on before on online messageboards. Bug description When starting a new, detached process with Process.Spawn in a posix system, if the parent process outlives the child, the child process remains in zombie state for the parent process' lifetime. The bug described above is demonstrated in the CMake project attached to this document. Analysis The spawn function injects the syscall "signal(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN)" with a functor of type boost::process::detail::posix::sig_init_. This is done to the forked child process, to no avail. And this is not done (and should not be done) in the parent process being too intrusive. Possible mitigation Introducing an in-between forked process that serves as the parent of the to-be-spawned process with SIGCHLD set to SIG_IGN would prevent the spawned process to become zombie, and simultaneously does not disturb the parent process' signal handlers. Introducing another class alternative to sig_init_ with the functionality described above would be a reasonable approach. An implementation sketch of the double fork method can be found in the attached project. System used OS: Ubuntu 18.04.6 LTS arch: x86_64 compiler: gcc-7.5.0 libc: libc-2.27 boost: 1.79.0 (built from source) Best regards, Benedek Tass

3 6

Boost 1.80.0 closed for beta
by Glen Fernandes 07 Jul '22

07 Jul '22

Master is closed for all changes. See the release schedule at: https://www.boost.org/development/index.html -- Release managers

2 1

Boost 1.80 closed for all major changes
by Glen Fernandes 05 Jul '22

05 Jul '22

The next deadlines: - On 2022-07-06 master is closed for all changes. - On 2022-07-13 the beta is published -- Release Managers

3 6

Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Boost.URL review planned for 13-22 August 2022
by Vinnie Falco 29 Jun '22

29 Jun '22

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 2:15 AM Mateusz Loskot via Boost-users <boost-users(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > we have planned the review shortly after the upcoming release of the Boost 1.80. The review starts in August but there is no rule that says folks can't look at the library sooner :) The library is in very good shape and likely usable for your project today (although we do expect bugs to be found, which will be fixed as they get reported). Check it out here: <https://github.com/CPPAlliance/url> Docs: <https://master.url.cpp.al/> We're glad to answer any questions at any time either on the list or feel free to open an issue in the repository (even if it is just a question). Thanks

2 1

Boost Regression Results Not Updating
by Tom Kent 25 Jun '22

25 Jun '22

I just noticed that something happened with the regression results and they haven't updated since last Friday. https://www.boost.org/development/tests/master/developer/summary.html https://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/summary.html I'm not sure where these run these days, would it fit in a github action on the regression repo? Tom

3 3

Possible develop config issue on arm32
by Tom Kent 25 Jun '22

25 Jun '22

I have a regression runner running on raspberry pi 32-bit architecture (in addition to a one on 64-bit raspberry pi and tons of X86). gcc-8 builds fine in both master and develop clang-9 builds fine on master clang-9 running the same command line, just on develop, has errors like this [1], finding basic includes: ``` "clang++-9" -c -x c++ -Wno-c99-extensions -std=c++2a -O0 -fno-inline -Wall -g --target=arm-pc-linux -Wno-deprecated-declarations -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_BEAST_ALLOW_DEPRECATED -DBOOST_BEAST_SEPARATE_COMPILATION -DBOOST_TEST_NO_AUTO_LINK=1 -I".." -o "/mnt/fs1/teeks99-05/run/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/accumulators/test/count.test/clang-linux-9~c++2a/debug/link-static/count.o" "../libs/accumulators/test/count.cpp" clang: warning: unknown platform, assuming -mfloat-abi=soft clang: warning: unknown platform, assuming -mfloat-abi=soft In file included from ../libs/accumulators/test/count.cpp:6: In file included from ../boost/test/unit_test.hpp:18: In file included from ../boost/test/test_tools.hpp:17: In file included from ../boost/config.hpp:44: ../boost/config/detail/select_stdlib_config.hpp:26:14: fatal error: 'cstddef' file not found # include <cstddef> ^~~~~~~~~ 1 error generated. ``` The relevant line of the user-config.jam is: using clang : 9~c++2a : clang++-9 : <cxxflags>"-Wno-c99-extensions -std=c++2a" ; The two command lines being run are: run.py --runner=teeks99-05-mc9-2a-32onarmv7l --toolsets=clang-9~c++2a \ "--bjam-options=-j4 address-model=32 --remove-test-targets" \ --comment=info.html --tag=master run.py --runner=teeks99-05-dc9-2a-32onarmv7l --toolsets=clang-9~c++2a \ "--bjam-options=-j4 address-model=32 --remove-test-targets" \ --comment=info.html --tag=develop Any ideas why master and develop would be different in this regard? Something with B2 changes? Thanks, Tom [1] https://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/teeks99-05…

3 2

Boost.URL review
by Klemens Morgenstern 24 Jun '22

24 Jun '22

Hi guys, I would like to volunteer as review manager for boost.url. Who can guide me through the process? Best regards, Klemens

2 2

Boost 1.80 closed for new libraries and breaking changes
by Glen Fernandes 23 Jun '22

23 Jun '22

Next deadline: On 2022-06-29 closed for all major code changes. See https://www.boost.org/development/index.html for the full calendar. -- Release Managers

1 0

Delayed response for sleep function
by Daggumati, Rajesh 21 Jun '22

21 Jun '22

Hi Team, When I use boost sleep function, I am getting delayed response. How to overcome this issue. Is there any alternative for this? boost::posix_time::ptime t1 = boost::posix_time::microsec_clock::local_time(); boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::millisec(10000)); boost::posix_time::ptime t2 = boost::posix_time::microsec_clock::local_time(); boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::millisec(10000)); boost::posix_time::ptime t3 = boost::posix_time::microsec_clock::local_time(); boost::posix_time::time_duration diff = t2 - t1; std::cout << diff.total_milliseconds() << std::endl; boost::posix_time::time_duration diff1 = t3 - t2; std::cout << diff1.total_milliseconds() << std::endl; output is : 10005 10006 Expected ouput should be 10000 and 10000 Regards, Rajesh D Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us by email by replying to the sender and delete this message. The sender disclaims that the content of this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any agreement; provided that the foregoing does not invalidate the binding effect of any digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included in any attachment.

6 8

Re: [boost] Delayed response for sleep function
by William Linkmeyer 21 Jun '22

21 Jun '22

This is interesting and helpful — yes! Although, it sounds like it’s more pertinent to software timers, right? I’ve done some work with hardware RTCs, many of which drift by 4ms/day, others by a few ms/year. (For physical quartz clocks, drift is a function of temperature and crystal frequency.) I had assumed that these clocks were more-or-less ubiquitous on computers today. Anyway, best regards and thank you for your detailed response. WL > On Jun 21, 2022, at 4:12 AM, Neil Groves <neilgroves(a)gmail.com> wrote: >

2 2