-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
"Missing Binary Operator Before Token "C" " #364
Comments
I have the same issue on Ubuntu 21.10 with Boost 1.70.0. I modified
I have yet to try a newer version of Boost if anything was changed here. |
This is fixed by #297 |
Summary --- In glibc >= 2.34 `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN` has been made dynamic which causes Boost 1.70 to fail to build. This has been fixed in boostorg/thread#297 for Solaris which also uses a function call for `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. See: * fabaff/nixpkgs@629e531 * boostorg/thread#364 * boostorg/thread#283 Test plan --- * Use a build OS that includes glibc >= 3.34 * `cd depends` * `make build-linux64`
Summary --- In glibc >= 2.34 `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN` has been made dynamic which causes Boost 1.70 to fail to build. This has been fixed in boostorg/thread#297 for Solaris which also uses a function call for `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. See: * fabaff/nixpkgs@629e531 * boostorg/thread#364 * boostorg/thread#283 Test plan --- * Use a build OS that includes glibc >= 3.34 * `cd depends` * `make build-linux64`
Summary --- In glibc >= 2.34 `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN` has been made dynamic which causes Boost 1.70 to fail to build. This has been fixed in boostorg/thread#297 for Solaris which also uses a function call for `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. See: * fabaff/nixpkgs@629e531 * boostorg/thread#364 * boostorg/thread#283 Test plan --- * Use a build OS that includes glibc >= 3.34 (eg Ubuntu 22.04) * `cd depends` * `make HOST=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu`
There is a Boost bug (boostorg/thread#364) in 1.69 causing a build failure with GCC 12 related to `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. This is fixed in Boost 1.73 but that cannot be used yet due to an active warning, see boostorg/test#357
There is a Boost bug (boostorg/thread#364) in 1.69 causing a build failure with GCC 12 related to `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. This is fixed in Boost 1.73 but that triggers a warning in GCC12: boostorg/test#357 Hence use GCC 11 and Boost 1.73
There is a Boost bug (boostorg/thread#364) in 1.69 causing a build failure with GCC 12 related to `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. This is fixed in Boost 1.73 but that triggers a warning in GCC12: boostorg/test#357 Hence use GCC 11 and Boost 1.73
There is a Boost bug (boostorg/thread#364) in 1.69 causing a build failure with GCC 12 related to `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. This is fixed in Boost 1.73 but that triggers a warning in GCC12: boostorg/test#357 Hence use GCC 11 and Boost 1.73
There is a Boost bug (boostorg/thread#364) in 1.69 causing a build failure with GCC 12 related to `PTHREAD_STACK_MIN`. This is fixed in Boost 1.73 but that triggers a warning in GCC12: boostorg/test#357 Hence use GCC 11 and Boost 1.73
yes my problem also fixed with paste that command top of the if |
Summary --- CI is currently failing after merge of !1838 because !1838 was on CI image -v2 (older gcc) and we are now on -v4 (newer gcc). Boost 1.71 unfortunately has a bug in a header related to the fact that PTHREAD_STACK_MIN is sometimes not an integer literal but is rather a function call to sysconf(). We thus bring this commit as a patch into our depends boost building process: boostorg/thread@74fb0a2 See related discussion: boostorg/thread#364 Test Plan --- - Observe CI which is presently broken on master succeed with this commit.
Another user on Ubuntu 20.04 who is experiencing this issue with gcc 10.x, I'm on Ubuntu 22.04 with gcc 11.2.0. (Quoting the original issue which is from 2019 and has been closed; where someone had an issue on Solaris)
My specific issue (Identical to original)
Still facing this issue. Is the issue closed? Ubuntu 20.04 and g++ --version = 10.3.0
Originally posted by @seerviashish in #283 (comment)
Related to Issue in KAPOWMINER: RavenCommunity/kawpowminer#111
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: