-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:35:13 +0400 Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com> wrote:
Bryce Lelbach wrote:
Compile [2010-10-27 01:49:54 UTC]: fail
"/sierra/Sntools/extras/compilers/intel/Compiler/11.0/081/bin/intel64/icpc" -c -xc++ -O0 -g -w1 -inline-level=0 -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_SERIALIZATION_DYN_LINK=1 -I".." -c -o "/scratch/boost/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/serialization/build/intel- linux-11.0/debug/xml_wgrammar.o" "../libs/serialization/src/xml_wgrammar.cpp"
300 second time limit exceeded
The test box is running Red Hat, and has an impressive Dual Duo-Core Intel Xeon (3Ghz) with 8Gb RAM. My machine is running an experimental Linux kernel built with Clang and full debugging symbols (not to mention my kernel was not optimized). My hardware is an Intel Core 2 Duo, and 2Gb RAM. I was running X, procmail and firefox while testing (I suspect the Red Hat server has none of those installed, much less running during tests). My times:
wash@Pegasus:~/boost/status$ time icpc -c -xc++ -O0 -g -w1 -inline-level=0 -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_SERIALIZATION_DYN_LINK=1 -I".." -c -o "/scratch/boost/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/serialization/build/intel- linux-11.0/debug/xml_wgrammar.o" "../libs/serialization/src/xml_wgrammar.cpp"
real 5m54.892s user 5m44.142s sys 0m1.128s
I just can't imagine the Xeon being that slow, relative to my numbers...
I don't suppose Boost tests are being run on a dedicated machine...
- Volodya
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Just in case anyone misses it, I posted an RFC to the Boost.Users list about this. I think this is a good chance to discuss Spirit porting questions that may well become relevant if somebody was to decide to port Wave to Spirit 2.x someday. I am going to spend some time tommorow refactoring the grammar. I will try to get it into a state where it can pass all the tests (VACPP, Intel, MSVC) in the allocated 300 timeout on the test matrix. I still think it is good idea to consider pulling the new grammar at this point in time, but with SVN, it is a bit painful to do branching. I think if I can get the following done, we should consider keeping it in trunk: * Reduce the number of warnings with GCC and MSVC * Passes tests on VACPP, Intel and MSVC - -- Bryce Lelbach aka wash http://groups.google.com/group/ariel_devel -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkzJGV8ACgkQO/fqqIuE2t7OjQCgs3e3D5+u1qVoLaCy+dE1iUE+ hIgAoMxT0irDiqrqSle+yEwB5rVKRb0n =CPxh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----