[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
20010814: netcdf-3.5.0 configure problem with gcc 3.0
- Subject: 20010814: netcdf-3.5.0 configure problem with gcc 3.0
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 16:49:01 -0600
Mike,
Thanks for the information. We'll visit this problem when we have gcc
3.0 installed on one of our Linux systems.
Regards,
Steve Emmerson <http://www.unidata.ucar.edu>
>Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:17:23 -0600 (MDT)
>From: Mike Romberg <address@hidden>
>Organization: UCAR/Unidata
>To: Steve Emmerson <address@hidden>
>Subject: 20010809: netcdf-3.5.0 configure problem with gcc 3.0
>Keywords: 200108092258.f79Mwt111020
>
> >>>>> " " == Steve Emmerson <address@hidden> writes:
>
> Sorry for not getting back to you sooner.
>
> > Mike, We aren't able to duplicate your problem because we don't
> > yet have gcc 3.0 installed on any of our Linux systems. When
> > it's installed we'll try your problem.
>
> > We did encounter one difficulty in executing the configure
> > script when using gcc 3.0, however. It appears absolutely
> > necessary to have the pathname of the directory that contains
> > the gcc 3.0 runtime libraries in the LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> > environment variable. If this isn't done, then the GNU C++
> > compiler will fail to pass the configure script's reality-check
> > (and rightfully so since every gcc 3.0-built program will
> > fail).
>
> Yea. This is a new feature I'm not really happy with either. I
> think it has something to do with getting exceptions to work with
> shared libraries. I was able to figure this out myself. This one is
> not really a netcdf problem. The gcc documentation does mention it.
> But I bet lots of folks will still get bit by the problem.
>
> > We're surprised by the necessity for the "throw()" clause in
> > the declaration of the C exit() function because C functions
> > can't throw exceptions (that's a C++ construct) and the "extern
> > C" clause should have covered that issue. Could it be that your
> > problem is also due to an incomplete LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> > environment variable? Would you be willing to test this?
>
> My guess is that we owe this exit() throw() thing to the new C++
> standard. It has managed to foul up quite a few other things about
> the language. My guess is that the committee specified that exit() in
> C++ should now be declared this way. I know that this problem has
> nothing to to with the LD_LIBRARY_PATH since I've already fixed that
> problem.
>
> The real funny thing is that if I regenerate your configure script
> using the same version of autoconf on a redhat 7.1 machine, it puts in
> code with the throw bit. This makes gcc-3.0 happy. So, this might
> actually be a bug in autoconf.
>
> Mike (address@hidden)