[ace-users] FYI: Compiler warnings with ACE 5.4.4 and g++ 4.0-20050213
Hi, in order to evaluate if we tapped onto a compiler problem I compiled our code with one of the g++ snapshots available (4.0-20050213). I noticed some compiler warnings that I wanted to share: As part of compiling our application we used the following warning switches for g++: -W -Wall -Wpointer-arith -Wno-uninitialized -Woverloaded-virtual -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -Wcomments /opt2/ACE_wrappers/TAO/tao/Collocation_Proxy_Broker.h:45: warning: 'class TAO::Collocation_Proxy_Broker' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor /opt2/ACE_wrappers/ace/Signal.h:274: warning: 'class ACE_Sig_Handler' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor /opt2/ACE_wrappers/ace/Signal.h:441: warning: 'class ACE_Sig_Handlers' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor Lothar -- Lothar Werzinger Dipl.-Ing. Univ. framework & platform architect Xcerla Corporation 275 Tennant Avenue, Suite 202 Morgan Hill, Ca 95037 email: lothar@xcerla.com phone: +1-408-776-9018 ...

[ace-users] Re: [tao-support] Has ACE 5.4.4/TAO 1.4.4 been built with gcc 4.0.0 yet
Hi Robert, > When building ACE 5.4.4/TAO 1.4.4 using gcc 4.0.0 under fedora core > 4 test 2 on an x86 platform I get a lot of errors mainly to do with > template instantiations. Has anyone successfully build TAO/ACE using > the latest gcc ? We just added GCC 4.0.0 support to ACE+TAO recently. The forthcoming x.4.5 beta should work nicely with GCC 4.0.0. We hope to have this available very shortly (there's just one remaining snag with typecodes that should be fixed in the next day or so). If you'd like to give things a try before we release x.4.5 please download the contents of ACE+TAO from our CVS repo at http://cvs.doc.wustl.edu/ and see if it works for you on your platform. If not, please let us know and we'll try to make sure that it's working before we put out the beta release. Thanks, Doug I've tried the CVS version on macosx 10.4, with gcc4.0 and still got the same intantiation problem. On 5/9/05, Douglas C. Schmidt <schmidt@cs.wustl.edu> wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > > When building ACE 5.4.4/TAO 1.4.4 using gcc 4.0.0 under fedora core > > 4 test 2 on an x86 platform I get a lot of errors mainly to do with > > template instantiations. Has anyone successfully build TAO/ACE using > > the latest gcc ? > > We just added GCC 4.0.0 support to ACE+TAO recently. The forthcoming > x.4.5 beta should work nicely with GCC 4.0.0. We hope to ha...

RE: [tao-users] Re: [ace-users] Re: Announcing the release of the new beta (ACE-5.4.10, TAO-1.4.10 and CIAO-0.4.10)
Hi, > > >> We encourage you to download the new beta, use it with your > > >> applications, and let us know soon if you encounter any problems > > >> since we plan to cut the x.5 release by February 28th. > > > > As per Wallace's comments, we have an aggressive schedule > for the x.5 > > release to meet the needs of some major sponsors. If > people can give > > x.4.10 a "test drive" in the next couple of days and report problems > > they encounter we'll try to ensure that we fix any > showstoppers before > > According to bugzilla bug 2323 is not fixed yet. > > http://deuce.doc.wustl.edu/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2323 > > For us it is a show stopper. We use the OCI version which does not > have problems related to this bug but it would be nice to be able to > use the latest version with more fixes. FYI, the reason that this test now fails is because Ossama added several new test cases which wheren't in the test in the past, this uncovered some bugs which according to our information where already there a long time. Johnny "Johnny Willemsen" <jwillemsen@remedy.nl> writes: > > > >> We encourage you to download the new beta, use it with your > > > >> applications, and let us know soon if you encounter any problems > > > >> sinc...

Re: [ace-users] Errors while compiling c++ 3.4.2
Hi Eyal, I believe we've fixed these problems in the latest version of ACE that's tucked inside our CVS repository. Can you please take a look at this version available in http://deuce.doc.wustl.edu/Download.html and see if things work better. If not, please let us know so we can fix them before we release ACE 5.4.3 in a week or so. Thanks, Doug >> I get the following while compiling: >> >> /usr/bin/c++ -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L -DNDEBUG -DUSING_GCC >> -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -DLINUX -I../inc >> -I../3rd_party...

Re: [ace-users] Re: ACE 5.4 compiling problems with g++ 3.4.3
Hi > First, please use the problem-report-form when asking questions. ACE 5.4 is > not supported with newer GCC versions. All these issues are resolved in the > upcoming x.4.3 release. > > For the time being, try to add the following to your config.h > > # if (__GNUC__ > 3 || (__GNUC__ == 3 && __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 4)) > # define ACE_EXPLICIT_TEMPLATE_DESTRUCTOR_TAKES_ARGS > # endif /* __GNUC__ >= 3.4 */ > > You are correct, the download link doesn't work. Bala, do you have an idea > what is happening with the downlo...

Re: [ace-users] ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error
Hi Olli, Can you please shed any light onto the following questions? Thanks, Doug >> ACE VERSION: 5.4.4 >> HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: >> LynxOS4.0.0 >> LynxOS4.0.0 >> TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: COMPILER NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL): >> GNU make - version 3.79.1 >> THE $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h FILE [if you use a link to a platform- specific file, simply state which one]: >> #include "ace/config-lynxos.h" >> THE $ACE_ROOT/include/makeinclude/platform_macros.GNU FILE [if you use a link to a platform-specific file, simply state which one (unless this isn't used in this case, e.g., with Microsoft Visual C++)]: >> exceptions=1 >> include $(ACE_ROOT)/include/makeinclude/platform_lynxos.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?] >> DOES THE PROBLEM AFFECT: COMPILATION? LINKING? On Unix systems, did you run make realclean first? EXECUTION? OTHER (please specify)? [Please indicate whether ACE, your application, or both are affected.] >> compile error >> SYNOPSIS: [Brief description of the problem] >> >> GNUmakefile: /usr/vl/ACE_wrappers/ACE_wrappers/ace...

[ace-users] Re: ACE 5.4 compiling problems with g++ 3.4.3
Hi Klaus, First, please use the problem-report-form when asking questions. ACE 5.4 is not supported with newer GCC versions. All these issues are resolved in the upcoming x.4.3 release. For the time being, try to add the following to your config.h # if (__GNUC__ > 3 || (__GNUC__ == 3 && __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 4)) # define ACE_EXPLICIT_TEMPLATE_DESTRUCTOR_TAKES_ARGS # endif /* __GNUC__ >= 3.4 */ You are correct, the download link doesn't work. Bala, do you have an idea what is happening with the download links. Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT ...

RE: [ace-users] Re: ACE 5.4 compilation error on HP-UX 11.11/GNU g++ 3.4.3
The needed fix is, indeed, in ACE 5.5. If, for some reason, you need to stay on 5.4, the 5.4e Fix Kit from Riverace has this problem fixed as well. The fix is needed for g++ 3.4 on any platform. -Steve -- Steve Huston, Riverace Corporation Helping you succeed with ACE See http://www.riverace.com/support.htm > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ace-users@cse.wustl.edu > [mailto:owner-ace-users@cse.wustl.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas C. Schmidt > Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 7:01 PM > To: ecoboja@yahoo.com; ace-users@cs.wustl.edu > Subject: [ace-users] Re: ACE 5.4 compilation error on HP-UX > 11.11/GNU g++ 3.4.3 > > > Hi, > > Thanks for using the PRF. > > >> ACE VERSION: 5.4 > > Please upgrade to ACE 5.5, which you can download from > > http://deuce.doc.wustl.edu/Download.html > > The DOC groups at Washington University, UC Irvine, and Vanderbilt > University only provide "best effort" support for non-sponsors for the > latest release, as described in > > http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE_wrappers/docs/ACE-bug-pro > cess.html > > Thus, if you need more "predictable" help for ACE 5.4, I recommend > that you check out > >...

[ace-users] Re: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86
Hi Jin, >> The solaris 9/10 for sparc is not the same as solaris 9/10 for >> Intel X86,although it is almost free,and the SunStudio 9 (CC >> 5.6)for sparc is not the same as SunStudio 9(CC 5.6) for Intel X86. This is yet one more reason why you'll need to do the legwork on this. Please let us know what you find out. Thanks, Doug -- Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt, Professor TEL: (615) 343-8197 Electrical Engineering and Computer Science FAX: (615) 343-7440 Vanderbilt University WEB: www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ Nashvil...

Re: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86
Hi, >> ACE VERSION: 5.4.3 Thakns for using the PRF! >> HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: >> Solaris10 X86 We (i.e., the DOC groups at UCI/VU/WU) don't have Solaris running on an x86 box (yet). It would therefore be great if you could figure out what patches need to be applied so that ACE compiles properly on this platform. BTW, Kitty/Bala, weren't we planning on running Solaris on an AMD box at some point? Thanks, Doug >> TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: >> COMPIL...

RE: [ace-users] FW: FW: ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error
Hi, > I tried upgrading to 5.4.5 and still have the same issue. Christine Can you check whether LynxOS has the vsprintf function in its system headers and then what the exact signature is and in which file it is declared? Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl > > -----Original Message----- > From: Olli Savia [mailto:ops@iki.fi] > Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 1:46 PM > To: Ballard, Christine > Subject: Re: FW: ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error > > > Hi > > I recommend upgrading to ACE 5.4.5 and see if your problem is fixed. > > Thanks, > Olli > > > Ballard, Christine wrote: > >>ACE VERSION: 5.4.4 > >>HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: > >> LynxOS4.0.0 > >> LynxOS4.0.0 > >>TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from > HOST: COMPILER > NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL): > >> GNU make - version 3.79.1 > >>THE $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h FILE [if you use a link to a platform- > specific file, simply state which one]: > >>#include "ace/config-lynxos.h" > >>THE $ACE_ROOT/include/makeinclude/platform_macros.GNU FILE > [if you use > a link to a platform-specific file, simply state which one > (unless this > isn't used in this case, e.g., with Mi...

RE: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Hi, > > > 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. > > > > I missed the compiler version. But, Forte 8 gives output of > SUN C++ 5.5. Ok, the problem is in platform_sunos5_sunc++.GNU, when a not known forte version is found, it defaults to explicit. I am updating right now, for 4.2 and 5.3 we default to explicit, for all others to implicit Qinghuajin and other Forte...

RE: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Hi, > > Ok, the problem is in platform_sunos5_sunc++.GNU, when a > not known forte > > version is found, it defaults to explicit. I am updating > right now, for 4.2 > > and 5.3 we default to explicit, for all others to implicit > > Is this necessary? I mean make it implicit by default. The > explicit is > not even supported, and has no chance to work cleanly. Why > should we patch > broken stuff. Just a thought? I have thought also about this, but maybe there are users around we don't know if. We can drop all this after x.5 is released, until that time, I just keep it there, just as we have a lot of other stuff that is probably broken. > > Qinghuajin and other Forte 9 users, you can work around > this by added the > > following line to your platform_macros.GNU file. > > templates = implicit > > This is until we release x.4.4., right? Yes, with x.4.4 this will be done correctly. Johnny ...

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: ...

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

RE: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
> Ok. Steve, could you maybe make clear with the build names > which builds use explicit templates? I'll try to get this clarified. > Explicit templates in TAO are known to be broken at this > moment. None of the tests at Riverace try to build TAO. -Steve ...

RE: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Hi, > >> It's almost up. There are some issues with installing software as > >> we don't have the media in a compatible form yet. We also don't > >> have Sun CC, and we need to purchase a licence if we need to > >> support Sun CC. > > Ok, that's fine - thanks for the update. I think some other folks > (e.g., LMCO ATL and Remedy) have Solaris 9/10 and Sun CC, so we may > not need to worry about running Sun CC on our machine. Johnny/Gautam, > can you folks please confirm/deny whether you've got Sun CC on Solar...

Re: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Hi Jin, Thanks for using the PRF. >> ACE VERSION: 5.4.3 >> >> HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: >> Solaris 10 x86 >> >> TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: >> COMPILER NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL): >> Sun Studio 9 (Sun CC 5.6) As we've mentioned several times now, we don't have this compiler installed yet on this hardware platform, so if you want things to be fixed soon I recommend you figure out what's going wrong and send us the patches. Otherwise, pl...

RE: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
> > Ok, the problem is in platform_sunos5_sunc++.GNU, when a > not known forte > > version is found, it defaults to explicit. I am updating > right now, for 4.2 > > and 5.3 we default to explicit, for all others to implicit This sounds good. > Is this necessary? I mean make it implicit by default. The > explicit is > not even supported, and has no chance to work cleanly. Why > should we patch > broken stuff. Just a thought? At least for ACE 5.5, Riverace supports the Forte compiler that requires explicit. After that, we can drop it....

Re: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Hi Jin, >> I rebuild the ACE package according the instruction above,but get >> the same result. It doesn't look to me like you've added -DACE_HAS_X86_STAT_MACROS to the build-line as recommended by Johnny Willemsen. >> my platform_macros.GNU file has the following lines: >> >> templates = implicit >> include $(ACE_ROOT)/include/makeinclude/platform_sunos5_sunc++.GNU >> >> When i rebuild the ACE library,get the following compile errors: >> $ make inline=0 -j 2 -k -f GNUmakefile.ACE >> ... >&...

Re: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Hi Everyon: My SunBlade 150 is back up and available, and has a Sun CC license, though I don't have a lot of bandwidth to admin it. Bala know where it is and has the root password. I'll probably move it into the server room once I have a chance to talk to Dan about it, but I my be out of town this week. [dhinton@blade DRM]$ uname -a SunOS blade 5.9 Generic_112233-03 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-100 Solaris [dhinton@blade DRM]$ CC -V CC: Forte Developer 7 C++ 5.4 2002/03/09 [dhinton@blade DRM]$ gcc --version gcc (GCC) 3.4.2 Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation, ...

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 pa...

Re: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Johnny- > Ok, the problem is in platform_sunos5_sunc++.GNU, when a not known forte > version is found, it defaults to explicit. I am updating right now, for 4.2 > and 5.3 we default to explicit, for all others to implicit Is this necessary? I mean make it implicit by default. The explicit is not even supported, and has no chance to work cleanly. Why should we patch broken stuff. Just a thought? > Qinghuajin and other Forte 9 users, you can work around this by added the > following line to your platform_macros.GNU file. > templates = implicit This is until w...

RE: [ace-users]: ACE 5.4.2 and ACE 5.4.3 compile failed on Solaris 9 x86 and Solaris 10 x86 #2
Hi Steve, > > Is this necessary? I mean make it implicit by default. The > > explicit is > > not even supported, and has no chance to work cleanly. Why > > should we patch > > broken stuff. Just a thought? > > At least for ACE 5.5, Riverace supports the Forte compiler that > requires explicit. After that, we can drop it. Ok. Steve, could you maybe make clear with the build names which builds use explicit templates? Explicit templates in TAO are known to be broken at this moment. Johnny ...