f



Re: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2

Hi

> >     ACE VERSION: 5.4.3
> > 
> >     HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM:
> >          Solaris10  X86   
> >     TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST:
> >     COMPILER NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL):
> >         Compiler:  SUN CC 5.6     
		^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I don't think the DOC group supports this compiler anymore.. More 
particularly this compiler is buggy and you may land up with unresolved
symbols even if you get past this part. 

My $0.02. 

Thanks
Bala

 
> >         Make:      GNU make 3.80
> > 
> >     CONTENTS OF $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h [if you use a link to a
> > platform-
> >     specific file, simply state which one]:
> >         #include "ace/config-sunos5.9.h"
> > 
> >     CONTENTS OF $ACE_ROOT/include/makeinclude/platform_macros.GNU
> > (unless
> >     this isn't used in this case, e.g., with Microsoft Visual C++):
> >         include $(ACE_ROOT)/include/makeinclude/platform_sunos5_sunc++.GNU
> > 
> > 
> >     CONTENTS OF $ACE_ROOT/bin/MakeProjectCreator/config/default.features
> >     (used by MPC when you generate your own makefiles):
> > 
> >     AREA/CLASS/EXAMPLE AFFECTED:
> > [What example failed?  What module failed to compile?]
> >     "ace/OS_NS_sys_stat.cpp"
> > 
> >     DOES THE PROBLEM AFFECT:
> >         COMPILATION?
> >         yes
> > 
> >         LINKING?
> >             On Unix systems, did you run make realclean first?
> >         yes
> > 
> >         EXECUTION?
> >         OTHER (please specify)?
> > [Please indicate whether ACE, your application, or both are affected.]
> > 
> >     SYNOPSIS:
> > [Brief description of the problem]
> >     fail to compile "OS_NS_sys_stat.cpp"
> > 
> >     DESCRIPTION:
> > [Detailed description of problem.  Don't just say "<blah>
> > doesn't work, here's a fix," explain what your program does
> > to get to the <blah> state. ]
> >     when i compile ACE package,i type
> >     make inline=0 -f GNUmakefile.ACE
> > there are several files fail to compiled,and the complier have the
> > following output:
> > 
> > CC -mt -g -instances=explicit 
> > -DACE_HAS_EXPLICIT_TEMPLATE_INSTANTIATION -DSUN_CC_HAS_PVFC_BUG  
> > -I/export/home/hua/DevTools/ACE_wrappers -DACE_HAS_EXCEPTIONS
> > -DACE_NO_INLINE -I.. -DACE_HAS_ACE_TOKEN -DACE_HAS_ACE_SVCCONF
> > -DACE_BUILD_DLL  -c -KPIC -o .shobj/OS_NS_sys_stat.o
> > OS_NS_sys_stat.cpp
> > "/export/home/hua/DevTools/ACE_wrappers/ace/OS_NS_sys_stat.inl", line
> > 37: Error: fstat(int, stat*) is not a member of ACE_OS.
> > "/export/home/hua/DevTools/ACE_wrappers/ace/OS_NS_sys_stat.inl", line
> > 120: Error: fstat is not a member of ACE_OS.
> > "/export/home/hua/DevTools/ACE_wrappers/ace/OS_NS_sys_stat.inl", line
> > 142: Error: "ACE_OS::lstat(const char*, stat*)" was previously
> > declared "ACE_OS::lstat(const wchar_t*, stat*)".
> > "/export/home/hua/DevTools/ACE_wrappers/ace/OS_NS_sys_stat.inl", line
> > 163: Error: Formal argument file of type const wchar_t* in call to
> > ACE_OS::lstat(const wchar_t*, stat*) is being passed char*.
> > 
> > CC -mt -g -instances=explicit 
> > -DACE_HAS_EXPLICIT_TEMPLATE_INSTANTIATION -DSUN_CC_HAS_PVFC_BUG  
> > -I/export/home/hua/DevTools/ACE_wrappers -DACE_HAS_EXCEPTIONS
> > -DACE_NO_INLINE -I.. -DACE_HAS_ACE_TOKEN -DACE_HAS_ACE_SVCCONF
> > -DACE_BUILD_DLL  -c -KPIC -o .shobj/OS_NS_Thread.o OS_NS_Thread.cpp
> > "/export/home/hua/DevTools/ACE_wrappers/ace/OS_NS_sys_utsname.inl",
> > line 14: Error: uname(utsname*) is not a member of ACE_OS.
> > 
> > I try to compile ACE  5.4.2 on Solaris 9 for X86,and have the same
> > problems.
> > 
> > 
> >     REPEAT BY:
> > [What you did to get the error; include test program or session
> > transcript if at all possible.  ]
> > 
> >     SAMPLE FIX/WORKAROUND:
> > [If available ]
> 













































































0
Balachandran
1/3/2005 4:31:59 PM
comp.soft-sys.ace 20326 articles. 1 followers. marlow.andrew (167) is leader. Post Follow

0 Replies
1227 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 42

Reply: