Re: Bugs in g++ on Sarge?
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 11:22, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 08:59, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > > > The bugs are *not* repeatable. I can type make, have the make
> > > > choke on something like the above, type make again, and it will get
> > > > through the compile.
> > >
> > > Are you sure you don't have hardware problems?
> > > Most likely such gcc failures are caused by bad ram and/or processor
> > > overheat.
> >
> > I'd actually be relieved if it was a hardware problem, then I could
> > just by some replacement memory or whatever and be done with it. Any
> > suggestions as to tests I could run to track that down? I can run a
> > copy of Memtest86 on the box tonight. I just don't see any other signs
> > of instability on the box, and it gets quite heavily used, compiling a
> > lot of code every day as a development server. Is it just that g++ is
> > working the memory a lot harder than gcc/php/mysql/xfree86/everything
> > else?
>
> I'm not absolutely sure that it's hearware-related.
> However, non-reproducable ICE on normal hardware is something really
> strange. G++ itself is completely deterministic.
> G++ on large files with hard usage of templates is something that exercises
> CPU and memory seriously. So it *may* show problems that other load
> doesn't show. On the other case, if the box is in heavy daily use, and no
> hardware failures happen, maybe hardware is OK.
>
> Strange. Very strange.
>
> Can't you test compilation of library in question on another box?
Well, I just successfully compiled the code on a box I have
access to which is installed with RH 8.0. It's a P4 1.5 GHz with
512 MB RAM. The version of g++ on it is 3.2-7 (RedHat 8.0). OK,
so this begins to look like it *could* be the hardware, but I hate
comparing apples to oranges on something like this. I really wish
I could do the test on a machine that's running Sarge. Has anyone
else compiled this software (QuickFIX 1.9.2) successfully on a
Sarge box?
Thanks for the feedback on this. I will post more as I go.
regards,
Jim
Reply to: