http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #8 from Jamie Allsop ja11sop at yahoo dot co.uk 2012-05-28
09:09:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #4)
It was a vanilla bjam build of boost 1.49, so
no -std=c++11.
Then
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #7 from Jamie Allsop ja11sop at yahoo dot co.uk 2012-05-26
10:59:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
(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,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |normal
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-25
18:22:16 UTC ---
I only tried briefly but couldn't reproduce a crash with boost 1.47, will try
later with boost 1.49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #4 from Jamie Allsop ja11sop at yahoo dot co.uk 2012-05-25
22:04:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
(Blocker means it blocks a GCC release, so changing priority.)
Is the progam_options library built with -std=c++11 ?
Thanks for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #5 from Jamie Allsop ja11sop at yahoo dot co.uk 2012-05-25
22:16:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I only tried briefly but couldn't reproduce a crash with boost 1.47, will try
later with boost 1.49
For clarity I should say I
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
