Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve wrote:
I am using Boost.Python all the time under Tru64 with cxx 6.5, and have been doing so for many years. I guess there must be a difference in how we compile. I am not using bjam but a SCons-based build system. The result of building with the Boost CVS from earlier this morning, including the cxx commands, is here:
http://cci.lbl.gov/cctbx_build/results/2005_06_15_0643/tru64_py241_build_log
All our regression tests (many) passed.
Do you use the patched header file for <iotraits> when compiling boost.python? Because I just tried compiling with different options and now I got bitten by the missing support for std::fpos_t. cxx -c -std strict_ansi -nopure_cname -noimplicit_include -timplicit_local -ptr "../../../bin/boost/libs/python/build/libboost_python.so/tru64cxx65-042/debug/cxx_repository" -msg_display_number -msg_disable 186,450,1115 -DBOOST_PYTHON_DYNAMIC_LIB -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -g3 -O0 -inline none -version V6.5-042 -ieee -gall -D__CNAME_OVERLOADS -model ansi -I"../../../bin/boost/libs/python/build" -I"/usr/include" -I"/net/camos/opt/include/python2.3" -I"/net/camos/opt/exec/OSF1-V5.1-alpha/include/python2.3" -I"/net/users/schoepflin/src/boost/boost-HEAD" -o "../../../bin/boost/libs/python/build/libboost_python.so/tru64cxx65-042/debug/function.o" "/net/users/schoepflin/src/boost/boost-HEAD/libs/python/build/../src/object/function.cpp" ...failed tru64cxx65-C++-action ../../../bin/boost/libs/python/build/libboost_python.so/tru64cxx65-042/debug/function.o... tru64cxx65-C++-action ../../../bin/boost/libs/python/build/libboost_python.so/tru64cxx65-042/debug/inheritance.o cxx: Error: /usr/lib/cmplrs/cxx/V6.5-042/include/cxx/iotraits, line 246: #415 no suitable constructor exists to convert from "int" to "std::fpos_t" , _RWfp(fpos_t(0)) -----------------^ cxx: Error: /usr/lib/cmplrs/cxx/V6.5-042/include/cxx/iotraits, line 330: #413 no suitable conversion function from "std::fpos_t" to "long" exists long var=_RWfp; -------------^ ... Markus