From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-392907-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 4987 invoked by alias); 26 May 2012 00:02:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 4978 invoked by uid 22791); 26 May 2012 00:02:37 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 26 May 2012 00:02:14 +0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/53490] Segmentation Fault when accessing std::set
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 00:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-53490-4-E5m2ONjdlc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53490-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53490-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg02525.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490

--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-26 00:02:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> It was a vanilla bjam build of boost 1.49, so
> no -std=c++11.

Then technically that's not supported, since there are no guarantees of
link-compatibility between -std=c++98 and -std=c++11 code (but I'm not aware of
any specific reasons it wouldn't work for a std::set)

(In reply to comment #5)
> For clarity I should say I just tried with a vanilla build of 1.47 and get
> essentially the same backtrace here.

I don't think the build of boost 1.47 I used earlier was non-vanilla in any
way, and I get no segfault on Fedora 16 using the system's
boost-static-1.47.0-6.fc16.x86_64.rpm with:

~/gcc/4.7/bin/g++ j.cc -std=c++11 -Wl,-Bstatic -lboost_program_options
-Wl,-Bdynamic

Is it significant that you link statically? Does it fail in the same way if you
link dynamically?