Solaris x86 Forte compiler error: ube: error: Assert has been violatedat - Solaris

This is a discussion on Solaris x86 Forte compiler error: ube: error: Assert has been violatedat - Solaris ; I'm getting this error on my Solaris x86 box, running Community edition build 89. cc -xc99 -I../../src/extra/zlib -I../../src/extra/bzip2 -I../../src/extra/pcre -I. -I../../src/include -I../../src/include -I/opt/csw/include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -O -xlibmieee -c saveload.c -o saveload.o "saveload.c", [RemakeNextSEXP]:ube: error: Assert has been violated at '/set/mar s_patch/builds.intel-S2/nightly.Fri/intel-S2/lang/ube/opt/src/cfg.c ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Solaris x86 Forte compiler error: ube: error: Assert has been violatedat

  1. Solaris x86 Forte compiler error: ube: error: Assert has been violatedat

    I'm getting this error on my Solaris x86 box, running Community edition
    build 89.


    cc -xc99 -I../../src/extra/zlib -I../../src/extra/bzip2
    -I../../src/extra/pcre -I. -I../../src/include -I../../src/include
    -I/opt/csw/include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -O -xlibmieee -c saveload.c -o
    saveload.o
    "saveload.c", [RemakeNextSEXP]:ube: error: Assert has been violated at
    '/set/mar
    s_patch/builds.intel-S2/nightly.Fri/intel-S2/lang/ube/opt/src/cfg.c 9201'.
    cc: ube failed for saveload.c


    drkirkby@kingfisher:[~/R-2.7.0] $ cc -V
    cc: Sun C 5.9 SunOS_i386 Patch 124868-01 2007/07/12
    usage: cc [ options] files. Use 'cc -flags' for details


    I've got no idea where all this "builds.intel-S2/nightly.Fri/" comes
    from - it is not in the source code of what I'm compiling.

    Anyone know of a fix for this? I know patches are not supported on
    Nevada, but I found this patch

    http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/advse...toDocument=yes

    which was issued on the 5th May this year.

    My OS has a release date of 6th May - only a day later.

    drkirkby@kingfisher:[~/R-2.7.0] $ cat /etc/release
    Solaris Express Community Edition snv_89 X86
    Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
    Use is subject to license terms.
    Assembled 06 May 2008


    Checking the dates on files, it appeared the patch had newer files than
    the build 89, so with nothing much to loose, I downloaded the patch and
    applied it manually. It did not however cure the problem.

    Anyone know if this problem has been fixed in build 90, which I have on
    DVD, but it is difficult to install on my laptop due to the fact it is
    50 miles away from me! (I've loaned my Dad my laptop, but have access
    via SSH!)



    Dave


  2. Re: Solaris x86 Forte compiler error: ube: error: Assert has been violated at

    On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:23:45 +0100, Dave wrote:

    > drkirkby@kingfisher:[~/R-2.7.0] $ cc -V
    > cc: Sun C 5.9 SunOS_i386 Patch 124868-01 2007/07/12


    There have been several patches besides the one you mentioned:

    duhring@einstein:~$ cc -V
    cc: Sun C 5.9 SunOS_i386 Patch 124868-05 2008/05/13

    Try installing SunStudio12 from the package download as opposed to the
    bzipped tarball. Then you can apply the needed packages:

    duhring@einstein:~/u$ ls
    120186-16.zip 124869-02.zip 126496-02.zip 127002-04.zip
    124864-04.zip 124873-04.zip 126498-06.zip 127144-03.zip
    124868-05.zip 125062-04.zip 126996-03.zip


  3. Re: Solaris x86 Forte compiler error: ube: error: Assert has beenviolated at

    Dave Uhring wrote:
    > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:23:45 +0100, Dave wrote:
    >
    >> drkirkby@kingfisher:[~/R-2.7.0] $ cc -V
    >> cc: Sun C 5.9 SunOS_i386 Patch 124868-01 2007/07/12

    >
    > There have been several patches besides the one you mentioned:
    >
    > duhring@einstein:~$ cc -V
    > cc: Sun C 5.9 SunOS_i386 Patch 124868-05 2008/05/13
    >
    > Try installing SunStudio12 from the package download as opposed to the
    > bzipped tarball. Then you can apply the needed packages:
    >
    > duhring@einstein:~/u$ ls
    > 120186-16.zip 124869-02.zip 126496-02.zip 127002-04.zip
    > 124864-04.zip 124873-04.zip 126498-06.zip 127144-03.zip
    > 124868-05.zip 125062-04.zip 126996-03.zip
    >



    Do you mean "packages" or "patches" in that last sentence? Are you
    suggesting I download Sun Studio 12, then patch it with patchadd? I
    don't know if Nevada will support that.

    I've got build 90 on DVD, which I will install tommorow after I get my
    laptop back. I'll see if that sorts it out. If not, I'm open to other
    suggestions.



  4. Re: Solaris x86 Forte compiler error: ube: error: Assert has been violated at

    On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:13:33 +0100, Dave wrote:
    > Dave Uhring wrote:


    >> Try installing SunStudio12 from the package download as opposed to the
    >> bzipped tarball. Then you can apply the needed packages:


    > Do you mean "packages" or "patches" in that last sentence? Are you
    > suggesting I download Sun Studio 12, then patch it with patchadd? I
    > don't know if Nevada will support that.


    Oops. "Then you can apply the needed patches".

    If you install SunStudio12 from the Nevada DVD you will simply unpack a
    tarball and patches will not apply because the package information will
    not exist in /var/sadm/pkg.

    duhring@einstein:/var/sadm/pkg$ ls -d SPRO*
    SPROatd SPROdwrfx SPROl90 SPROmrdbx SPROmrxd SPROsclx SPROtlbn7
    SPROcc SPROf90 SPROl90s SPROmrdmk SPROmrxm SPROsmpx SPROtll7
    SPROcmpl SPROfd SPROl90sx SPROmrdwf SPROpl SPROsmsx SPROtll7x
    SPROcpl SPROfdxd SPROl90x SPROmrftn SPROplg SPROsslnk SPROudchk
    SPROcplx SPROftool SPROlang SPROmrgc SPROpls SPROstl4a SPROutool
    SPROctags SPROgc SPROlangx SPROmride SPROplsx SPROstl4h SPROxmbin
    SPROctsrc SPROgcx SPROlgc SPROmripl SPROplx SPROstl4o SPROxmshr
    SPROdbx SPROgvim SPROlgcx SPROmrmp SPROpnsn SPROstl4x SPROxmsrc
    SPROdbxui SPROidext SPROlklnt SPROmrpan SPROprfan SPROstl4y
    SPROdbxx SPROipl SPROm9xs SPROmrpgn SPROprflb SPROsunms
    SPROdemo SPROiplg SPROmr3m SPROmrpl SPROsbe SPROsvc
    SPROdmake SPROiplx SPROmrcc SPROmrsbe SPROsbld SPROsysprp
    SPROdwrfb SPROjdbx SPROmrcom SPROmrstd SPROsbldx SPROtdemo
    SPROdwrfs SPROjdbxx SPROmrcpl SPROmrtcv SPROscl SPROtl7x



+ Reply to Thread