Subject: Re: [boost] [serialization] Linker errors in trunk
From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-29 11:30:07
> Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
> >>> Sorry, resending as it ended up on the wrong list...
> >>>
> >>> -----------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Since the latest changes in trunk I'm seeing linker errors while
> >>> linking with the serialization library (VS2005 SP1,
> >>> boost_serialization-vc80-mt-gd-1_40.lib):
> >>>
> >>> runtime_support.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol
> >>> "__declspec(dllimport) public: __thiscall
> >>> boost::archive::archive_exception::archive_exception(enum
> >>> boost::archive::archive_exception::_exception_code,char const
> *,char
> >>> const *)"
> >>>
> (__imp_??0archive_exception_at_archive@boost@@QAE_at_W4_exception_code_at_012@PB
> >>> D1_at_Z)
> >>>
> >>> (note the leading underscore in _exception_code)
> >>>
> >>> Which is really strange as this symbol is the only missing one.
> >>>
> >>> OTOH, the library exports the symbol:
> >>>
> >>> boost::archive::archive_exception::archive_exception(
> >>> enum boost::archive::archive_exception::exception_code,
> >>> char const *,char const *);
> >>>
> >>> (note the missing underscore in exception_code)
> >>>
> >>> If I change the first parameter of the archive_exception
> >>> constructor to be a 'int' everything builds fine.
> >>
> >> Ok, I solved it. The MS header file excpt.h has a
> >>
> >> #define exception_code _exception_code
> >>
> >> which leads to problems if not consistently included. Doh! What a
> >> mess.
> >>
> >> The bottom line is, that archive_exception.cpp needs to be compiled
> >> with exactly the same windows headers included (excpt.h gets
> >> included by windows.h) as any sources including
> >> archive_exception.hpp, which is
> >> generally not possible to ensure.
> >>
> >> The only fail-proof way I could see is to always have
> >>
> >> #if defined(BOOST_WINDOWS)
> >> #include <excpt.h>
> >> #endif
> >>
> >> inside archive_exception.hpp, globally mapping exception_code to
> >> _exception_code. Patch attached.
> >> Ok to commit?
>
> Hmmm - let's think about this a little bit. We could
> change "exception_code" to something else. I don't
> think it would break user code since user code
> might refer to the enum member names rather than
> the "exception_code".
Sure, should work as well. It's your decision...
But please try to decide this as soon as possible, as currently it's just
broken.
Thanks!
Regards Hartmut