Have you tried disabling TBB? That might show something interesting.
Could it be that TBB is compiled with C++11 support... so passing an object
from it down into a C++98 compiled STL might not work out?
I don't remember how we get TBB... Jason: did _we_ compile TBB ourselves?
Derek
On Tue, J
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 12:45 PM, John Peterson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM, John Peterson wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2014, at 12:47 PM, Cody Permann wrote:
>>
>> John, just so you are up to speed Jason has reproduced this result on "rod",
>> "cone" and "hpcbuild4" in addition to the
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM, John Peterson wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 8, 2014, at 12:47 PM, Cody Permann wrote:
>
> John, just so you are up to speed Jason has reproduced this result on "rod",
> "cone" and "hpcbuild4" in addition to the original failure on "hpcbuild5",
> you just need to add that ne
> On Jul 8, 2014, at 12:47 PM, Cody Permann wrote:
>
> John, just so you are up to speed Jason has reproduced this result on "rod",
> "cone" and "hpcbuild4" in addition to the original failure on "hpcbuild5",
> you just need to add that new flag so it's definitely popping up on multiple
> sy
John, just so you are up to speed Jason has reproduced this result on
"rod", "cone" and "hpcbuild4" in addition to the original failure on
"hpcbuild5", you just need to add that new flag so it's definitely popping
up on multiple systems now. Roy's theory is interesting but I'm surprised
that we ar
> On Jul 8, 2014, at 12:20 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
>
>
>> On Tue, 8 Jul 2014, John Peterson wrote:
>>
>> Wait, what? --disable-cxx11 is the same behavior we've had since
>> forever, so it can't be causing a *new* valgrind error.
>
> No, sadly it's not what our behavior used to be, just what
On Tue, 8 Jul 2014, John Peterson wrote:
> Wait, what? --disable-cxx11 is the same behavior we've had since
> forever, so it can't be causing a *new* valgrind error.
No, sadly it's not what our behavior used to be, just what our
behavior *should* have been. I think I had a long-open issue abou
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Cody Permann wrote:
> UPDATE: With our testing we have determined that the culprit is
> --disable-cxx11
>
> If you take a clean Linux box, configure libMesh with that option and run
> adaptivity example 5 with Valgrind you will see an error similar to the
> first
> On Jul 8, 2014, at 11:21 AM, "Cody Permann" wrote:
>
> ilar to the first message in this thread. I suppose that it really could be
> a compiler bug since I still can't see what is wrong with that method.
Thanks for the update. I wonder if that's the case and of so maybe it could be
replica
UPDATE: With our testing we have determined that the culprit is
--disable-cxx11
If you take a clean Linux box, configure libMesh with that option and run
adaptivity example 5 with Valgrind you will see an error similar to the
first message in this thread. I suppose that it really could be a comp
10 matches
Mail list logo
