Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Andre Poenitz wrote:

On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 12:29:28PM +0100, Peter Kuemmel wrote:

Yes, and all there other changes done in my branch, it builds with
the express sp1 compiler.

And when someone wanna use a compiler not supporting TR1 he could
use boost::tr1. But the code could complete changed to tr1, 
boost::tr1 should be selected at configure time.


Well, having both around does not save work. So if we can't 
completely switch I rather wouldn't.


It's only one system, and there the system boost could be used.
We could not support all compilers with out repository code.

Peter

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Andre Poenitz wrote:

On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 12:29:28PM +0100, Peter Kuemmel wrote:

Yes, and all there other changes done in my branch, it builds with
the express sp1 compiler.

And when someone wanna use a compiler not supporting TR1 he could
use boost::tr1. But the code could complete changed to tr1, 
boost::tr1 should be selected at configure time.


Well, having both around does not save work. So if we can't 
completely switch I rather wouldn't.


It's only one system, and there the system boost could be used.
We could not support all compilers with out repository code.

Peter

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kuemmel]

 On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
  Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
  maybe this was the problem.
 
  Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
  SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.
 
  Now it is...
 
 Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
 std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Yes, and all there other changes done in my branch, it builds with
the express sp1 compiler.

And when someone wanna use a compiler not supporting TR1 he could
use boost::tr1. But the code could complete changed to tr1, 
boost::tr1 should be selected at configure time.

Peter


-- 
Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: 
http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kuemmel]

  Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
  std::tr1::shared_ptr now?
 
 Be aware that this will break compilation on Solaris.

But we could use boost as fallback, because it now compiles 
on Solaris with boost and boost also provides  its templates
in the tr1 namespace:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_38_0?view=filtered_std-tr1

Sure we have to change the configure process a bit.

Peter
-- 
Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: 
http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kuemmel]

  Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
  std::tr1::shared_ptr now?
 
 Be aware that this will break compilation on Solaris.
 

But we could use boost as fallback, because it now compiles
on Solaris with boost and boost also provides  its templates
in the tr1 namespace:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_38_0?view=filtered_std-tr1

Sure we have to change the configure process a bit.

Peter

-- 
Computer Bild Tarifsieger! GMX FreeDSL - Telefonanschluss + DSL
für nur 17,95 Euro/mtl.!* http://dsl.gmx.de/?ac=OM.AD.PD003K11308T4569a

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 12:29:28PM +0100, Peter Kuemmel wrote:
 Yes, and all there other changes done in my branch, it builds with
 the express sp1 compiler.
 
 And when someone wanna use a compiler not supporting TR1 he could
 use boost::tr1. But the code could complete changed to tr1, 
 boost::tr1 should be selected at configure time.

Well, having both around does not save work. So if we can't 
completely switch I rather wouldn't.

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kuemmel]

> On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> >> Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
> >> maybe this was the problem.
> >>
> > Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
> > SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.
> >
> > Now it is...
> 
> Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
> std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Yes, and all there other changes done in my branch, it builds with
the express sp1 compiler.

And when someone wanna use a compiler not supporting TR1 he could
use boost::tr1. But the code could complete changed to tr1, 
boost::tr1 should be selected at configure time.

Peter


-- 
Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: 
http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kuemmel]

> > Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
> > std::tr1::shared_ptr now?
> 
> Be aware that this will break compilation on Solaris.

But we could use boost as fallback, because it now compiles 
on Solaris with boost and boost also provides  its templates
in the tr1 namespace:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_38_0?view=filtered_std-tr1

Sure we have to change the configure process a bit.

Peter
-- 
Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: 
http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kuemmel]

> > Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
> > std::tr1::shared_ptr now?
> 
> Be aware that this will break compilation on Solaris.
> 

But we could use boost as fallback, because it now compiles
on Solaris with boost and boost also provides  its templates
in the tr1 namespace:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_38_0?view=filtered_std-tr1

Sure we have to change the configure process a bit.

Peter

-- 
Computer Bild Tarifsieger! GMX FreeDSL - Telefonanschluss + DSL
für nur 17,95 Euro/mtl.!* http://dsl.gmx.de/?ac=OM.AD.PD003K11308T4569a

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 12:29:28PM +0100, Peter Kuemmel wrote:
> Yes, and all there other changes done in my branch, it builds with
> the express sp1 compiler.
> 
> And when someone wanna use a compiler not supporting TR1 he could
> use boost::tr1. But the code could complete changed to tr1, 
> boost::tr1 should be selected at configure time.

Well, having both around does not save work. So if we can't 
completely switch I rather wouldn't.

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

  

| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem 
then, I

might have a look.

  
Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++ 
2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?


Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
maybe this was the problem.

Peter

Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting 
SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.


Now it is...

Vincent

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
 Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
 maybe this was the problem.

 Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
 SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.

 Now it is...

Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

Andre Poenitz schreef:

On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
  

Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
maybe this was the problem.

  
Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.


Now it is...



Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Andre'
  

Well, the attached works for me, so yes.

By the way, please note that I had to use

#include memory

while in http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/27520 you used

#include tr1/memory

which doesn't work here.

Vincent
Index: src/graphics/GraphicsCache.h
===
--- src/graphics/GraphicsCache.h(revision 28704)
+++ src/graphics/GraphicsCache.h(working copy)
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
 #ifndef GRAPHICSCACHE_H
 #define GRAPHICSCACHE_H
 
-#include boost/shared_ptr.hpp
+#include memory
 
 #include vector
 #include string
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@
 *
 *  You have been warned!
 */
-   typedef boost::shared_ptrCacheItem ItemPtr;
+   typedef std::tr1::shared_ptrCacheItem ItemPtr;
///
ItemPtr const item(support::FileName const  file) const;
 
Index: src/graphics/GraphicsLoader.cpp
===
--- src/graphics/GraphicsLoader.cpp (revision 28704)
+++ src/graphics/GraphicsLoader.cpp (working copy)
@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@
 //
 /
 
-typedef boost::shared_ptrImage ImagePtr;
+typedef std::tr1::shared_ptrImage ImagePtr;
 
 class Loader::Impl : public boost::signals::trackable {
 public:

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:56:05PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:

 On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
  Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
  maybe this was the problem.
 
  Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
  SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.
 
  Now it is...
 
 Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
 std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Be aware that this will break compilation on Solaris.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

  

| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem 
then, I

might have a look.

  
Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++ 
2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?


Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
maybe this was the problem.

Peter

Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting 
SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.


Now it is...

Vincent

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
>> maybe this was the problem.
>>
> Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
> SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.
>
> Now it is...

Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

Andre Poenitz schreef:

On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
  

Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
maybe this was the problem.

  
Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.


Now it is...



Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Andre'
  

Well, the attached works for me, so yes.

By the way, please note that I had to use

#include 

while in http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/27520 you used

#include 

which doesn't work here.

Vincent
Index: src/graphics/GraphicsCache.h
===
--- src/graphics/GraphicsCache.h(revision 28704)
+++ src/graphics/GraphicsCache.h(working copy)
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
 #ifndef GRAPHICSCACHE_H
 #define GRAPHICSCACHE_H
 
-#include 
+#include 
 
 #include 
 #include 
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@
 *
 *  You have been warned!
 */
-   typedef boost::shared_ptr ItemPtr;
+   typedef std::tr1::shared_ptr ItemPtr;
///
ItemPtr const item(support::FileName const & file) const;
 
Index: src/graphics/GraphicsLoader.cpp
===
--- src/graphics/GraphicsLoader.cpp (revision 28704)
+++ src/graphics/GraphicsLoader.cpp (working copy)
@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@
 //
 /
 
-typedef boost::shared_ptr ImagePtr;
+typedef std::tr1::shared_ptr ImagePtr;
 
 class Loader::Impl : public boost::signals::trackable {
 public:

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:56:05PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> >> Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
> >> maybe this was the problem.
> >>
> > Yes, I knew that was the problem. However, at the time of the meeting  
> > SP1 was not available for the Express Edition.
> >
> > Now it is...
> 
> Doex that mean we are free to replace boost::shared_ptr by
> std::tr1::shared_ptr now?

Be aware that this will break compilation on Solaris.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes schreef:

Andre Poenitz
andre.poen...@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de
writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
  

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)


Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
  

| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
might have a look.

  
Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++ 
2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?


Anyway, it would be nice if that would continue to work ;-)..

Vincent

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

Vincent van Ravesteijn v.f.vanraveste...@tudelft.nl writes:
 Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++
 2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?

Yes, probably.

JMarc

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:

Lars Gullik Bjønnes schreef:

Andre Poenitz
andre.poen...@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de
writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
 

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)


Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
  

| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
might have a look.

  
Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++ 
2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?


Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
maybe this was the problem.

Peter


Anyway, it would be nice if that would continue to work ;-)..

Vincent

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes schreef:

Andre Poenitz

writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
  

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)


Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
  

| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
might have a look.

  
Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++ 
2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?


Anyway, it would be nice if that would continue to work ;-)..

Vincent

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

Vincent van Ravesteijn  writes:
> Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++
> 2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?

Yes, probably.

JMarc

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:

Lars Gullik Bjønnes schreef:

Andre Poenitz

writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
 

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)


Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
  

| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
might have a look.

  
Wasn't this the thingie that made me complain that Visual Studio C++ 
2008 Express Edition wouldn't compile anymore ?


Only Visual Studio C++ 2008 Express with SP1 supports TR1,
maybe this was the problem.

Peter


Anyway, it would be nice if that would continue to work ;-)..

Vincent

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

lar...@gullik.org (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
 In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
 date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
 stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
 to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

Yes please.

JMarc

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Pavel Sanda]

Richard Heck wrote:
 Lars Gullik Bj??nnes wrote:
 Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:

 | Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
   
 In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
 date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
 stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
 to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
   
 | the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our 
 sources
 | as discussed few times ago.

 Right... I forgot... Qt app now.

 I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

   
 Well, as far as I know, we're not that close to removing boost. A quick 
 grep still turns up a lot. So something needs doing. I'll be on fc10 in a 
 week or so.

i thought the main reason for including boost in our tree was that we used some
nifty new features and it was not usuall that linux distributions have such a
new version. but this is long time ago, so this reason no more holds. afaik all
changes to boost are just squashing compiler warnings, no bug fixing etc. so i
wonder whats the point of including it in our sources. we could only bump
requirement and let this job on the shoulders of distro mantainers. ?

pavel

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:
 i thought the main reason for including boost in our tree was that we
 used some nifty new features and it was not usuall that linux
 distributions have such a new version. but this is long time ago, so
 this reason no more holds. 

But it will again if we upgrade the boost version that we require.

JMarc

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Pavel Sanda]

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
 Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:
  i thought the main reason for including boost in our tree was that we
  used some nifty new features and it was not usuall that linux
  distributions have such a new version. but this is long time ago, so
  this reason no more holds. 
 
 But it will again if we upgrade the boost version that we require.

i think this is a different situation, but i dont want to flame more.
at least Lars will have some fun :)

pavel

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 01:54:29AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:
 
 | Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
  In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
  date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
  stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
  to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
 
 | the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
 | as discussed few times ago.
 
 Right... I forgot... Qt app now.
 
 I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

No, the idea was that after a while the systems ship a boost that's good
enough for LyX's use.

If that's still not the case, and boost 1.38 does not hurt otherwise,
updating the bundled boost seems a good idea.

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
 I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

 Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.

I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:54:31AM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 Right... I forgot... Qt app now.

 André attempted to really do this last meeting (using Qt in core) but  
 failed eventually :-)

Hm, not really. I seem to remember a consensus that using Qt in core
can follow pretty much the same rules as we have for other libraries:
Use it, if it makes sense (i.e. benefits outweigh costs) (contrary
to the old use whatever makes sense except if it has a 'Q' in the name).
It's just that nobody acted on that.

 Please don't. I am not active these days so there's basically zero  
 chance that I flame you ;-)

I re-discovered #lyx on oftc.net. A good place to enjoy absolute silence.

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Andre Poenitz wrote:

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.


I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.


I had no problems with tr1::shared_ptr only with scoped_ptr because
it is not part of tr1. But I did not try to compile with GCC.
To see hat GCC says is simple: just compile
lyx-devel/branches/personal/kuemmel/boost_1_36

Peter

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[José Matos]

On Wednesday 04 March 2009 00:09:49 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
 date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
 stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
 to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

I can compile with Fedora 11 and --without-included-boost but then the 
resulting program does not run.

Attached follows the back trace.

 --
     Lgb

-- 
José Abílio
(gdb) bt
  
warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)  
  

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340e in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x81433ce in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

#0  0x002feb16 in __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator_base::_M_detach_single 
(this=0x8e00e68) at ../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/debug.cc:249
#1  0x00300155 in __gnu_debug::_Safe_sequence_base::_M_detach_all 
(this=0x8e0a25c) at ../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/debug.cc:132   
#2  0x0814340e in ~_Safe_sequence_base (this=value optimized out, 
__in_chrg=value optimized out, __in_chrg=value optimized out)
at 
/usr/lib/gcc/i586-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../include/c++/4.4.0/debug/safe_base.h:185
  
#3  ~_Safe_sequence (this=value optimized out, __in_chrg=value optimized 
out, __in_chrg=value optimized out)   
at 
/usr/lib/gcc/i586-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../include/c++/4.4.0/debug/safe_sequence.h:103
#4  ~vector (this=value optimized out, __in_chrg=value optimized out, 
__in_chrg=value optimized out)
at 
/usr/lib/gcc/i586-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../include/c++/4.4.0/debug/vector:116
#5  ~data_t (this=value optimized out, __in_chrg=value optimized out, 
__in_chrg=value optimized out) at /usr/include/boost/signals/slot.hpp:32
#6  checked_deleteboost::signals::detail::slot_base::data_t (this=value 
optimized out, __in_chrg=value optimized out, __in_chrg=value optimized 
out)
at /usr/include/boost/checked_delete.hpp:34
#7  
boost::detail::sp_counted_impl_pboost::signals::detail::slot_base::data_t::dispose
 (this=value optimized out, __in_chrg=value optimized out,
__in_chrg=value optimized out) at 
/usr/include/boost/detail/sp_counted_impl.hpp:78
#8  0x0858bf41 in boost::detail::sp_counted_base::release (this=value 
optimized out) at /usr/include/boost/detail/sp_counted_base_nt.hpp:79
#9  ~shared_count (this=value optimized out) at 
/usr/include/boost/detail/shared_count.hpp:216
#10 ~shared_ptr (this=value optimized out) at 
/usr/include/boost/shared_ptr.hpp:165
#11 ~slot_base (this=value optimized out) at 
/usr/include/boost/signals/slot.hpp:27
#12 ~slot (this=value optimized out) at 
/usr/include/boost/signals/slot.hpp:105
#13 lyx::frontend::GuiView::GuiView (this=value optimized out) at 
../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiView.cpp:305
#14 0x08556543 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::createView (this=0x8ac3ba0, 
geometry_a...@0xbfffb0dc, autoShow=true, view_id=0)
at ../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiApplication.cpp:978
#15 0x0855c244 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::dispatch (this=0x8ac3ba0, 
c...@0xbfffc978)
at ../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiApplication.cpp:808
#16 0x081f385c in lyx::LyXFunc::dispatch (this=0x8ae8478, c...@0xbfffc978) at 
../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/LyXFunc.cpp:1674
#17 0x081d15ca in lyx::LyX::execCommands (this=0xb228) at 
../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/LyX.cpp:513
#18 0x081d20fd in lyx::execBatchCommands () at 
../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/LyX.cpp:475
#19 0x08558d84 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::execBatchCommands 
(this=0x8ac3ba0) at 
../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiApplication.cpp:1140
#20 0x0855d8b5 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::qt_metacall (this=0x8ac3ba0, 
_c=QMetaObject::InvokeMetaMethod, _id=148901480, _a=0xbfffd45c)
at ./moc_GuiApplication.cpp:75
#21 0x008b2a28 in QMetaObject::activate (sender=0x8cd8cf0, from_signal_index=4, 
to_signal_index=4, argv=0x0) at kernel/qobject.cpp:3069
#22 0x008b36c2 in QMetaObject::activate (sender=0x8cd8cf0, m=0x98db88, 
local_signal_index=0, argv=0x0) at kernel/qobject.cpp:3143
#23 0x008b7c47 in QSingleShotTimer::timeout (this=0x8cd8cf0) at 
.moc/release-shared/qtimer.moc:76
#24 0x008b7d5c in QSingleShotTimer::timerEvent 

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Andre Poenitz
andre.poen...@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de
writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
 I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

 Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.

| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
might have a look.

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

lar...@gullik.net (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
writes:

| Andre Poenitz
| andre.poen...@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de
| writes:

| | On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
 I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

 Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.

| | I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| | the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

| Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
| might have a look.

I would like to upgrade to 1.38 first though, and then work on replacing
boost libs with libs that exist in tr1 (or the upcoming standard).

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:28:33PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 
 I would like to upgrade to 1.38 first though, and then work on replacing
 boost libs with libs that exist in tr1 (or the upcoming standard).

please, note that there are systems (most notably, Solaris) that still
ship gcc 3.4.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Enrico Forestieri for...@lyx.org writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:28:33PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 
 I would like to upgrade to 1.38 first though, and then work on replacing
 boost libs with libs that exist in tr1 (or the upcoming standard).

| please, note that there are systems (most notably, Solaris) that still
| ship gcc 3.4.

I won't say too loud what I think of such systems.

But anyhow... do not expect me to for get about those... but soon (I
really, really hope) thost old compilers will just not be supported by
any C++ library (even Qt).

Q: Is that a sun provided solaris? Would I guess right in thinking that
that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
easy?

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 11:12:16PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 
 Q: Is that a sun provided solaris?

Yes, latest solaris 10 also bundles gcc:

$ pkginfo | grep gcc
system  SUNWgcc  gcc - The GNU C compiler
system  SUNWgccruntime   GCC Runtime libraries


 Would I guess right in thinking that
 that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
 actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
 easy?

Not so easy. You have to compile it yourself:
http://blogs.sun.com/timc/entry/building_gcc_4_x_on

Last time that I did that was for gcc 2.8.1, some years ago. Then, I
used packages provided by http://www.sunfreeware.com/ until Sun bundled
gcc with solaris. But only gcc 3.4.6 is currently available.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Enrico Forestieri for...@lyx.org writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 11:12:16PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 
 Q: Is that a sun provided solaris?

| Yes, latest solaris 10 also bundles gcc:

| $ pkginfo | grep gcc
| system  SUNWgcc  gcc - The GNU C compiler
| system  SUNWgccruntime   GCC Runtime libraries


 Would I guess right in thinking that
 that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
 actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
 easy?

| Not so easy. You have to compile it yourself:
| http://blogs.sun.com/timc/entry/building_gcc_4_x_on

| Last time that I did that was for gcc 2.8.1, some years ago. Then, I
| used packages provided by http://www.sunfreeware.com/ until Sun bundled
| gcc with solaris. But only gcc 3.4.6 is currently available.

I would found references to packaged or prebuilt at
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/binaries.html

But I must say if that is the most recent developemtn tools on solaris
it is hugely useless as a development platform (and I don't belive it
is). There must be something newer?

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[John Levon]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:23:26AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

 But I must say if that is the most recent developemtn tools on solaris
 it is hugely useless as a development platform (and I don't belive it
 is).

I get the impression most C++ people on Solaris are using Sun Studio.

 There must be something newer?

Not yet but not too long hopefully. 3.4.3 is heavily patched for various
Sun fixes so it's not entirely trivial to get GCC4 in place.

regards
john

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:23:26AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
 Enrico Forestieri for...@lyx.org writes:
 
 | On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 11:12:16PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
  
  Q: Is that a sun provided solaris?
 
 | Yes, latest solaris 10 also bundles gcc:
 
 | $ pkginfo | grep gcc
 | system  SUNWgcc  gcc - The GNU C compiler
 | system  SUNWgccruntime   GCC Runtime libraries
 
 
  Would I guess right in thinking that
  that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
  actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
  easy?
 
 | Not so easy. You have to compile it yourself:
 | http://blogs.sun.com/timc/entry/building_gcc_4_x_on
 
 | Last time that I did that was for gcc 2.8.1, some years ago. Then, I
 | used packages provided by http://www.sunfreeware.com/ until Sun bundled
 | gcc with solaris. But only gcc 3.4.6 is currently available.
 
 I would found references to packaged or prebuilt at
 http://gcc.gnu.org/install/binaries.html

Yep, but that redirects to the sunfreeware site where only gcc 3.4.6
is available.

 But I must say if that is the most recent developemtn tools on solaris
 it is hugely useless as a development platform (and I don't belive it
 is). There must be something newer?

http://developers.sun.com/sunstudio/

but I would like to use gcc.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

lar...@gullik.org (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
> In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
> date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
> stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
> to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

Yes please.

JMarc

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Pavel Sanda]

Richard Heck wrote:
> Lars Gullik Bj??nnes wrote:
>> Pavel Sanda  writes:
>>
>> | Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>>   
 In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
 date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
 stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
 to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
   
>> | the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our 
>> sources
>> | as discussed few times ago.
>>
>> Right... I forgot... Qt app now.
>>
>> I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)
>>
>>   
> Well, as far as I know, we're not that close to removing boost. A quick 
> grep still turns up a lot. So something needs doing. I'll be on fc10 in a 
> week or so.

i thought the main reason for including boost in our tree was that we used some
nifty new features and it was not usuall that linux distributions have such a
new version. but this is long time ago, so this reason no more holds. afaik all
changes to boost are just squashing compiler warnings, no bug fixing etc. so i
wonder whats the point of including it in our sources. we could only bump
requirement and let this job on the shoulders of distro mantainers. ?

pavel

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

Pavel Sanda  writes:
> i thought the main reason for including boost in our tree was that we
> used some nifty new features and it was not usuall that linux
> distributions have such a new version. but this is long time ago, so
> this reason no more holds. 

But it will again if we upgrade the boost version that we require.

JMarc

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Pavel Sanda]

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Pavel Sanda  writes:
> > i thought the main reason for including boost in our tree was that we
> > used some nifty new features and it was not usuall that linux
> > distributions have such a new version. but this is long time ago, so
> > this reason no more holds. 
> 
> But it will again if we upgrade the boost version that we require.

i think this is a different situation, but i dont want to flame more.
at least Lars will have some fun :)

pavel

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 01:54:29AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Pavel Sanda  writes:
> 
> | Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> >> In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
> >> date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
> >> stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
> >> to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
> >
> | the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
> | as discussed few times ago.
> 
> Right... I forgot... Qt app now.
> 
> I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

No, the idea was that after a while the systems ship a boost that's good
enough for LyX's use.

If that's still not the case, and boost 1.38 does not hurt otherwise,
updating the bundled boost seems a good idea.

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)
>
> Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.

I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Andre'
>
>

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Andre Poenitz]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:54:31AM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Right... I forgot... Qt app now.
>
> André attempted to really do this last meeting (using Qt in core) but  
> failed eventually :-)

Hm, not really. I seem to remember a consensus that using Qt in core
can follow pretty much the same rules as we have for other libraries:
Use it, if it makes sense (i.e. benefits outweigh costs) (contrary
to the old "use whatever makes sense except if it has a 'Q' in the name").
It's just that nobody acted on that.

> Please don't. I am not active these days so there's basically zero  
> chance that I flame you ;-)

I re-discovered #lyx on oftc.net. A good place to enjoy absolute silence.

Andre'

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Andre Poenitz wrote:

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.


I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.


I had no problems with tr1::shared_ptr only with scoped_ptr because
it is not part of tr1. But I did not try to compile with GCC.
To see hat GCC says is simple: just compile
lyx-devel/branches/personal/kuemmel/boost_1_36

Peter

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[José Matos]

On Wednesday 04 March 2009 00:09:49 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
> date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
> stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
> to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

I can compile with Fedora 11 and --without-included-boost but then the 
resulting program does not run.

Attached follows the back trace.

> --
>     Lgb

-- 
José Abílio
(gdb) bt
  
warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)  
  

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340e in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x81433ce in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

warning: (Internal error: pc 0x814340d in read in psymtab, but not in symtab.)

#0  0x002feb16 in __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator_base::_M_detach_single 
(this=0x8e00e68) at ../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/debug.cc:249
#1  0x00300155 in __gnu_debug::_Safe_sequence_base::_M_detach_all 
(this=0x8e0a25c) at ../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/debug.cc:132   
#2  0x0814340e in ~_Safe_sequence_base (this=, 
__in_chrg=, __in_chrg=)
at 
/usr/lib/gcc/i586-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../include/c++/4.4.0/debug/safe_base.h:185
  
#3  ~_Safe_sequence (this=, __in_chrg=, __in_chrg=)   
at 
/usr/lib/gcc/i586-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../include/c++/4.4.0/debug/safe_sequence.h:103
#4  ~vector (this=, __in_chrg=, 
__in_chrg=)
at 
/usr/lib/gcc/i586-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../include/c++/4.4.0/debug/vector:116
#5  ~data_t (this=, __in_chrg=, 
__in_chrg=) at /usr/include/boost/signals/slot.hpp:32
#6  checked_delete (this=, __in_chrg=, __in_chrg=)
at /usr/include/boost/checked_delete.hpp:34
#7  
boost::detail::sp_counted_impl_p::dispose
 (this=, __in_chrg=,
__in_chrg=) at 
/usr/include/boost/detail/sp_counted_impl.hpp:78
#8  0x0858bf41 in boost::detail::sp_counted_base::release (this=) at /usr/include/boost/detail/sp_counted_base_nt.hpp:79
#9  ~shared_count (this=) at 
/usr/include/boost/detail/shared_count.hpp:216
#10 ~shared_ptr (this=) at 
/usr/include/boost/shared_ptr.hpp:165
#11 ~slot_base (this=) at 
/usr/include/boost/signals/slot.hpp:27
#12 ~slot (this=) at 
/usr/include/boost/signals/slot.hpp:105
#13 lyx::frontend::GuiView::GuiView (this=) at 
../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiView.cpp:305
#14 0x08556543 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::createView (this=0x8ac3ba0, 
geometry_a...@0xbfffb0dc, autoShow=true, view_id=0)
at ../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiApplication.cpp:978
#15 0x0855c244 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::dispatch (this=0x8ac3ba0, 
c...@0xbfffc978)
at ../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiApplication.cpp:808
#16 0x081f385c in lyx::LyXFunc::dispatch (this=0x8ae8478, c...@0xbfffc978) at 
../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/LyXFunc.cpp:1674
#17 0x081d15ca in lyx::LyX::execCommands (this=0xb228) at 
../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/LyX.cpp:513
#18 0x081d20fd in lyx::execBatchCommands () at 
../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/LyX.cpp:475
#19 0x08558d84 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::execBatchCommands 
(this=0x8ac3ba0) at 
../../../../../lyx/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt4/GuiApplication.cpp:1140
#20 0x0855d8b5 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::qt_metacall (this=0x8ac3ba0, 
_c=QMetaObject::InvokeMetaMethod, _id=148901480, _a=0xbfffd45c)
at ./moc_GuiApplication.cpp:75
#21 0x008b2a28 in QMetaObject::activate (sender=0x8cd8cf0, from_signal_index=4, 
to_signal_index=4, argv=0x0) at kernel/qobject.cpp:3069
#22 0x008b36c2 in QMetaObject::activate (sender=0x8cd8cf0, m=0x98db88, 
local_signal_index=0, argv=0x0) at kernel/qobject.cpp:3143
#23 0x008b7c47 in QSingleShotTimer::timeout (this=0x8cd8cf0) at 
.moc/release-shared/qtimer.moc:76
#24 0x008b7d5c in QSingleShotTimer::timerEvent (this=0x8cd8cf0) at 
kernel/qtimer.cpp:298
#25 0x008ac92f in QObject::event (this=0x8cd8cf0, e=0xbfffd900) at 
kernel/qobject.cpp:1082
#26 0x00c9ad7c in QApplicationPrivate::notify_helper (this=0x8aec9b0, 
receiver=0x8cd8cf0, e=0xbfffd900) at kernel/qapplication.cpp:4084
#27 0x00ca21c4 in QApplication::notify (this=0x8ac3ba0, receiver=0x8cd8cf0, 
e=0xbfffd900) at kernel/qapplication.cpp:4049
#28 0x08555f17 in lyx::frontend::GuiApplication::notify (this=0x8ac3ba0, 
receiver=0x8cd8cf0, event=0xbfffd900)
at 

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Andre Poenitz

writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
>>> I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)
>>
>> Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
>
| I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.

Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
might have a look.

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

lar...@gullik.net (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
writes:

| Andre Poenitz
| 
| writes:
>
| | On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
 I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)
>>>
>>> Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
>>
| | I tried replacing our boost::shared_ptr with tr1::shared_ptr in
| | the week before the Meeting (gcc 4.3.x IIRC), and it did not compile.
>
| Hmm I have done that for other projects and I had little problem then, I
| might have a look.

I would like to upgrade to 1.38 first though, and then work on replacing
boost libs with libs that exist in tr1 (or the upcoming standard).

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:28:33PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> 
> I would like to upgrade to 1.38 first though, and then work on replacing
> boost libs with libs that exist in tr1 (or the upcoming standard).

please, note that there are systems (most notably, Solaris) that still
ship gcc 3.4.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Enrico Forestieri  writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:28:33PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> 
>> I would like to upgrade to 1.38 first though, and then work on replacing
>> boost libs with libs that exist in tr1 (or the upcoming standard).
>
| please, note that there are systems (most notably, Solaris) that still
| ship gcc 3.4.

I won't say too loud what I think of such systems.

But anyhow... do not expect me to for get about those... but soon (I
really, really hope) thost old compilers will just not be supported by
any C++ library (even Qt).

Q: Is that a sun provided solaris? Would I guess right in thinking that
that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
easy?

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 11:12:16PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> 
> Q: Is that a sun provided solaris?

Yes, latest solaris 10 also bundles gcc:

$ pkginfo | grep gcc
system  SUNWgcc  gcc - The GNU C compiler
system  SUNWgccruntime   GCC Runtime libraries


> Would I guess right in thinking that
> that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
> actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
> easy?

Not so easy. You have to compile it yourself:
http://blogs.sun.com/timc/entry/building_gcc_4_x_on

Last time that I did that was for gcc 2.8.1, some years ago. Then, I
used packages provided by http://www.sunfreeware.com/ until Sun bundled
gcc with solaris. But only gcc 3.4.6 is currently available.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Enrico Forestieri  writes:

| On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 11:12:16PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> 
>> Q: Is that a sun provided solaris?
>
| Yes, latest solaris 10 also bundles gcc:
>
| $ pkginfo | grep gcc
| system  SUNWgcc  gcc - The GNU C compiler
| system  SUNWgccruntime   GCC Runtime libraries
>
>
>> Would I guess right in thinking that
>> that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
>> actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
>> easy?
>
| Not so easy. You have to compile it yourself:
| http://blogs.sun.com/timc/entry/building_gcc_4_x_on
>
| Last time that I did that was for gcc 2.8.1, some years ago. Then, I
| used packages provided by http://www.sunfreeware.com/ until Sun bundled
| gcc with solaris. But only gcc 3.4.6 is currently available.

I would found references to packaged or prebuilt at
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/binaries.html

But I must say if that is the most recent developemtn tools on solaris
it is hugely useless as a development platform (and I don't belive it
is). There must be something newer?

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[John Levon]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:23:26AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

> But I must say if that is the most recent developemtn tools on solaris
> it is hugely useless as a development platform (and I don't belive it
> is).

I get the impression most C++ people on Solaris are using Sun Studio.

> There must be something newer?

Not yet but not too long hopefully. 3.4.3 is heavily patched for various
Sun fixes so it's not entirely trivial to get GCC4 in place.

regards
john

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:23:26AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Enrico Forestieri  writes:
> 
> | On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 11:12:16PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> >> 
> >> Q: Is that a sun provided solaris?
> >
> | Yes, latest solaris 10 also bundles gcc:
> >
> | $ pkginfo | grep gcc
> | system  SUNWgcc  gcc - The GNU C compiler
> | system  SUNWgccruntime   GCC Runtime libraries
> >
> >
> >> Would I guess right in thinking that
> >> that compiler is only for aimed at system stuff, and that if you
> >> actually want to do C++ developemt getting a newer gcc is in fact quite
> >> easy?
> >
> | Not so easy. You have to compile it yourself:
> | http://blogs.sun.com/timc/entry/building_gcc_4_x_on
> >
> | Last time that I did that was for gcc 2.8.1, some years ago. Then, I
> | used packages provided by http://www.sunfreeware.com/ until Sun bundled
> | gcc with solaris. But only gcc 3.4.6 is currently available.
> 
> I would found references to packaged or prebuilt at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/binaries.html

Yep, but that redirects to the sunfreeware site where only gcc 3.4.6
is available.

> But I must say if that is the most recent developemtn tools on solaris
> it is hugely useless as a development platform (and I don't belive it
> is). There must be something newer?

http://developers.sun.com/sunstudio/

but I would like to use gcc.

-- 
Enrico

Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

(Hi all!)

I see that Fedora 11 is doing rebuilding of all packages with gcc 4.4.
and that LyX is failing that. I though I should test it on my Fedora 10
box, and right enough I get the same errors.

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Pavel Sanda]

Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
 In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
 date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
 stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
 to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
as discussed few times ago.

pavel

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
 In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
 date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
 stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
 to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[rgheck]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
  

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
  

| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

  
Well, as far as I know, we're not that close to removing boost. A quick 
grep still turns up a lot. So something needs doing. I'll be on fc10 in 
a week or so.


rh

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?


Upgrading does not hurt, even if we remove boost later. I would 
say, go ahead.




| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.


Not completely, but maybe we should discuss this.
Since months the threads are so short here,  100. ;)



I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)


Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
And boost is only used as fall back for compilers with missing 
tr1 support.


I tried this once but couldn't finish because of problems with 
regex code:

http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/26656

Hope we could lure you into Lyx again!

Peter

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Abdelrazak Younes]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
  

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
  

| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.
  


André attempted to really do this last meeting (using Qt in core) but 
failed eventually :-)


More seriously, no, we still depend on boost and Pavel was just talking 
about making -without-included-boost the default.



I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)
  


Please don't. I am not active these days so there's basically zero 
chance that I flame you ;-)


Abdel.

Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

(Hi all!)

I see that Fedora 11 is doing rebuilding of all packages with gcc 4.4.
and that LyX is failing that. I though I should test it on my Fedora 10
box, and right enough I get the same errors.

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Pavel Sanda]

Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
> date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
> stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
> to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?

the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
as discussed few times ago.

pavel

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

Pavel Sanda  writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>> In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
>> date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
>> stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
>> to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
>
| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

-- 
Lgb

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[rgheck]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

Pavel Sanda  writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
  

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
  

| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.

I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)

  
Well, as far as I know, we're not that close to removing boost. A quick 
grep still turns up a lot. So something needs doing. I'll be on fc10 in 
a week or so.


rh

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Peter Kümmel]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

Pavel Sanda  writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?


Upgrading does not hurt, even if we remove boost later. I would 
say, go ahead.




| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.


Not completely, but maybe we should discuss this.
Since months the threads are so short here, < 100. ;)



I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)


Maybe you are interested in replacing boost with 'real' C++: TR1.
And boost is only used as fall back for compilers with missing 
tr1 support.


I tried this once but couldn't finish because of problems with 
regex code:

http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/26656

Hope we could lure you into Lyx again!

Peter

Re: Lyx + Boost and gcc 4.4

[Abdelrazak Younes]

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

Pavel Sanda  writes:

| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
  

In Fedora 11 the errors might probably be fixed by usinging a more up to
date boost (1.38 f.ex.) and --without-included-boost. For all others
stuck with an older boost no such luck. So I have a Q: Would you like me
to upgrade the included boost to boost 1.38?
  

| the other possibility is that we evetually get rid of boost from our sources
| as discussed few times ago.

Right... I forgot... Qt app now.
  


André attempted to really do this last meeting (using Qt in core) but 
failed eventually :-)


More seriously, no, we still depend on boost and Pavel was just talking 
about making -without-included-boost the default.



I think I'll just go and hide beneath my rock again ;-)
  


Please don't. I am not active these days so there's basically zero 
chance that I flame you ;-)


Abdel.