Re: Openvdb 10.0.1 failed on ppc64 architecture

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 17:51:08 -0800
Luya Tshimbalanga <luya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hello team,
> 
> openvdb only failed on ppc64 architecture due to this error:
> 
> --
> 
> [ 75%] Building CXX object openvdb/openvdb/CMakeFiles/openvdb_static.dir/instantiations/Composite.cc.o
> cd /builddir/build/BUILD/openvdb-10.0.1/redhat-linux-build/openvdb/openvdb && /usr/bin/g++ -DBOOST_IOSTREAMS_DYN_LINK -DBOOST_IOSTREAMS_NO_LIB -DOPENVDB_PRIVATE -DOPENVDB_STATICLIB -DOPENVDB_USE_DELAYED_LOADING -I/builddir/build/BUILD/openvdb-10.0.1/openvdb/openvdb/.. -I/builddir/build/BUILD/openvdb-10.0.1/redhat-linux-build/openvdb/openvdb -I/builddir/build/BUILD/openvdb-10.0.1/redhat-linux-build/openvdb/openvdb/openvdb -I/builddir/build/BUILD/openvdb-10.0.1/openvdb/openvdb/. -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1  -m64 -mcpu=power8 -mtune=power8 -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -Wl,--as-needed -DNDEBUG -std=c++17 -MD -MT openvdb/openvdb/CMakeFiles/openvdb_static.dir/instantiations/Composite.cc.o -MF CMakeFiles/openvdb_s
 tatic.dir/instantiations/Composite.cc.o.d -o CMakeFiles/openvdb_static.dir/instantiations/Composite.cc.o -c /builddir/build/BUILD/openvdb-10.0.1/redhat-linux-build/openvdb/openvdb/instantiations/Composite.cc
> g++: fatal error: Killed signal terminated program cc1plus
> compilation terminated.
> gmake[2]: *** [openvdb/openvdb/CMakeFiles/openvdb_shared.dir/build.make:625: openvdb/openvdb/CMakeFiles/openvdb_shared.dir/instantiations/GridOperators.cc.o] Error 1
> gmake[2]: *** Deleting file 'openvdb/openvdb/CMakeFiles/openvdb_shared.dir/instantiations/GridOperators.cc.o'
> gmake[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> --
> 
> Could someone investigate the issue for that architecture? We may 
> possibly temporarily disable that support  until the problem gets 
> resolved. Included is the attached spec yet committed.

I will take a closer look, but it looks to me like "OOM killer in
action", thus reducing build parallelism might help.


		Dan
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux