qt-x11-free-3.0.5 compile error
declan.moriarty at ntlworld.ie
Mon Jul 28 11:00:25 PDT 2003
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 09:16:09PM +0100, Matthew Burgess enlightened us thusly
> > > /usr/src/qt-x11-free-3.0.5/include/qvaluevector.h: In method
> > > `QValueVectorPrivate<Element>::QValueVectorPrivate(const
> > > QValueVectorPrivate<Element> &)':
> > > /usr/src/qt-x11-free-3.0.5/include/qvaluevector.h:476:
> > > instantiated from `QValueVector<Element>::detachInternal()'
> > > /usr/src/qt-x11-free-3.0.5/include/qvaluevector.h:459:
> > > instantiated from here
> > > /usr/src/qt-x11-free-3.0.5/include/qvaluevector.h:125: Internal
> > > compiler error.
> > You're trying to compile a C++ library with gcc-2.95.3? Good luck...
> > :)
> > As you are probably no doubt aware it's ability to handle anything
> > resembling standards compliant C++ code is fairly minimal. Anyway,
> > onto the point in hand, I assumed you have tried to re-run make after
> > receiving the error. I believe that Internal Compiler Errors (ICEs)
> > can occur for a number of reasons, although admittedly certain code
> > constructs (in particular C++ templates) can be the cause so it may
> > well fail at the same point next time around. If you have gcc-3.x I'd
> > strongly suggest compiling QT with that instead.
I didn't have gcc-3.x around. Every time I thought of adding it, I heard
of some massive bug and that everybody should upgrade to the next one.
Now I hear that gcc-3.x won't compile kernels. I have had none of this
suffering. I'm using qt-3.0.5, which is ovewr a year old and will, I
hope compile with gcc-2.95 as well this time as it did the last time.
> > A search of google turns up nothing (as I'm sure you're aware) other
> > than that some other poor sods have had exactly the same failure
> > (please forgive the wrapping in the google url):
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=qvaluevector.h+%22Internal+compiler+error%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
That's a very intelligent and specific serach designed to turn up moans
from the ignorant - Like me :).
> There's a response to the Rosegarden message hosted on Geocrawler.com
> (linked to by the above google URL) by the OP which suggest that
> removing the -O2 from the compiler flags may fix it.
Thanks, Matt, you're a star!. Removing the '-02' got it over the hump.
This is what I love about linux. I get this advice for free. What I hate
about linux was that the appropiate compiler flags were in such an
'obvious' place - NOT!
With best Regards,
More information about the blfs-support