Boost C++ Libraries: Ticket #4747: mingw linker errors: undefined references

attachment set

Mon, 18 Oct 2010 00:23:07 GMT

attachment → ser_jam-2010-10-15.patch

Bryce Adelstein Lelbach — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 00:41:02 GMT

Jim, could you post the full error your getting? I'd like to see that before applying your patch.

Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:42:46 GMT

Please forgive the typos: "... fifteen or so undefined references ..."

And that example without WikiFormatting is:

bin.v2\libs\serialization\build\gcc-mingw-4.4.0\release\threading-multi\basic_iarchive.o:
basic_iarchive.cpp:(.text+0x564):
 undefined reference to `_imp___ZNK5boost13serialization18extended_type_infoltERKS1_'

Which, demangled (without the win32 'imp' prefix) is:

boost::serialization::extended_type_info::operator<(boost::serialization::extended_type_info const&) const

I'll attach the full list of linker undefined references, but wanted put these here (for the search engines to find).

attachment set

Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:44:03 GMT

attachment → ser-link-errs-2010-10.txt

version, severity changed

Vladimir Prus — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:04:23 GMT

version Boost 1.44.0 → Boost 1.45.0
severity Problem → Showstopper

Boo, this means serialziation is just totally unusable on mingw, and there's easy fix? Let consider for 1.45

version, milestone changed

Vladimir Prus — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:07:06 GMT

version Boost 1.45.0 → Boost 1.44.0
milestone To Be Determined → Boost-1.45.0

cc, status changed; resolution set

Bryce Adelstein Lelbach — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 20:54:22 GMT

cc Bryce Adelstein Lelbach added
status new → closed
resolution → fixed

Thanks for the patch, Jim. As of r66123 this is fixed. Hopefully it doesn't break anything on other compilers.

Robert Ramey — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 21:07:51 GMT

I've updated the library so that this isn't needed please don't check this in.

Robert Ramey

Bryce Adelstein Lelbach — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 21:14:50 GMT

Ramey - I asked on Boost.Users for people to confirm, I got reports back that this was not fixed. I was unable to build without this patch. I've already committed it, ofc we can always revert if need be.

Bryce Adelstein Lelbach — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 21:18:33 GMT

Sorry Ramey - I thought this was Jim's other patch. You are correct, this isn't needed and I have NOT applied this patch. In my comment I was thanking Jim for the report/submission.