[Coin-discuss] query re. optimised builds for COIN

[Matthew Saltzman]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Laszlo Ladanyi wrote:

> I'm regularly building optimized code on Sun/AIX/Linux using gcc-2.95.3 and
> see no problem whatsoever...
>
> I'm planning to try gcc-3.0.x RSN :-)
>
> --Laci

I have the core dump with 2.96RH also, and debugging that is on my list.
Keep me posted on anything you find.

I have not in the past had trouble with 2.5.3.

I also plan to try 3.0.4 soon.  I recall that we fixed some things to make
sure that it would compile under 3.0.1, but I don't recall if we got it
running.  I know that C++ linking is a problem between any combination of
2.95.x, 2.96RH, and 3.x, so I don't know which solvers other than CPLEX
can be used with 3.x.  Of course, DyLP is available as source, so that's
not an issue here.

I have access to the Sun Forte compilers, but haven't tried them either.
That Workshop compiler bug looks nasty...

		Matt

>
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Lou Hafer wrote:
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > 	As the last step in testing OsiDylp, I've been trying to do optimised
> > builds in various programming environments. I'm finding it very frustrating
> > and am wondering about the experiences of others. In all cases the debug
> > build runs correctly and has no runtime memory errors I'm aware of. Here's
> > what I've seen with optimised builds:
> >
> >   * Sun Workshop 6 Update 1 on SPARC/Solaris 8 required rearrangment of code
> >     in OsiIndexedVector and OsiIndexedVectorTest in order to execute
> >     correctly. (The highlight was having CC claim that 1.0/1.0 == 24!)
> >
> >   * GCC 2.95.2 on SPARC/Solaris 8 was happy with the same code as Sun
> >     Workshop.
> >
> >   * GCC 2.96 on Intel/RedHat 7.1 dumps core in OsiPackedMatrix::getVector
> >     (gdb reports line 135 in OsiPackedMatrix.hpp). I haven't yet put serious
> >     time into debugging the problem.
> >
> > I'm looking for answers to two specific questions:
> >
> >   * I'd like to hear from people who have been able to make the optimised
> >     build with no problems. What was your programming environment? I'm
> >     assuming there are a fair number of you out there who have done this
> >     without problem.
> >
> >   * Does anyone have experience with GCC 3.0.x? I've given thought to
> >     upgrading but have been discouraged by comments at the gcc web page (GCC
> >     3.0 caveats) about problems interacting with gdb. The caveats are dated
> >     June 2001, but I haven't seen anything that states the problems are
> >     fixed.
> >
> >
> > 					Thanks,
> > 						Lou
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coin-discuss mailing list
> > Coin-discuss at www-124.ibm.com
> > http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/coin-discuss
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coin-discuss mailing list
> Coin-discuss at www-124.ibm.com
> http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/coin-discuss
>

-- 
		Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences          Editor, INFORMS Online
mjs at clemson.edu                           iol_editor at mail.informs.org
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs          http://www.informs.org