## ArrayFire 3.5.1 Compiled, using GCC 4.8.4 and CUDA – Failure!

In this earlier posting I had written, that I had installed GCC / CPP / C++ 4.8.4, alongside versions 6.3, on my computer named ‘Phosphene’, even though Debian / Stretch computers are not meant by design, to offer earlier versions of those compilers. And I had done so, specifically so that I’d be able to compile CUDA 8 projects, for which GCC version 6 is too high.

One possible CUDA project would have been ArrayFire 3.7.0, or version 3.6.3 of that same library. However, what I found was that these latest versions of ArrayFire require a stronger compiler, than v4.8.

Well what I have now been able to do is, to compile ArrayFire 3.5.1 using the GCC 4.8.4 tool-chain, and to do so, even with CUDA support. This is higher than what Debian Maintainers could do, if only because the package-repository version of ArrayFire do not include CUDA back-ends, only OpenCL back-ends.

This proves that my GCC 4.8.4, compatibility tool-chain is correctly installed.

The question which I must now ponder is, whether I should next install v3.5.1 of ArrayFire to my root file-system, replacing v3.7.0, just because the lower version gives me CUDA support. I might not because v3.7.0 already gives me OpenCL support. Either way, I built v3.5.1 with the configuration option, to ‘Use System Forge’, which may mean that I won’t need to recompile Forge, which was compiled as version 1.0.4, and as belonging to ArrayFire 3.7.0.

Installing v3.5.1 to my root file-system would be a necessary step, to verify whether the Demos actually run, since all ArrayFire Demos need to be linked to the same library-versions that their ArrayFire build generated.

(Update:)

What I have found is twofold:

1. The Configuration option ‘Use System Forge’ will not work, when the installed version of Forge is 1.0.4. This needs to be unchecked, and the integrated version of Forge built, and installed, and
2. Even though the exercise compiled, it will not run.

When trying to run a CUDA executable, I get the error message:


terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::regex_error'
what():  regex_error
Aborted



What this result means is that I have not been able to confirm that compiling and linking projects to CUDA finally works, using the platform I’ve created, even though the actual compilation produces no error message.

Dirk

## Compatibility GCC Installed

One of the more frustrating facts about Debian / Stretch is that its maintainers have broken with tradition, by no longer providing any compatibility versions of the main compilers, GCC, CPP and C++, which provide CC and C++ -language support, useful in 90% (+) of all programming that takes place. Instead, Debian / Stretch provides GCC / CPP / C++ version 6.3 alone. What I had already written about was, that the version of the CUDA Run-Time and Toolkit available from the standard repositories, has remained v8.0.44 for the time being. This CUDA Version does not support CC or C++ version 6 because version 6 of these compilers is too high!

One way in which power-users could try to remedy this situation would be, to install some sort of compatibility version of CC / C++, even though none is offered in the standard repositories. But, when we try to custom-compile let’s say, GCC v5.3, which would already be low enough for CUDA 8.0.44 to support, we find that GCC 6.3 is just plain unable to compile GCC 5.3, no matter what.

And so another way to solve the same problem can be, to add the old Debian Jessie / Oldstable repositories to our sources list, and then just to install from there.

I find this to be an extremely bad idea.

First of all, Debian differs from Ubuntu, in that Debian never provided GCC 5.3. In Debian / Jessie, what we got was GCC 4.8, or maybe even v4.9. But more importantly, simply sandwiching two incompatible repositories together can create a fatal set of problems.

What I was finally able to do, was just to download roughly a dozen packages as binaries, from the Debian Repository Web-site, which finally provided GCC, CPP and C++ v4.8. The path I took required that I run into the error message numerous times that dependencies could not be satisfied, because under Debian, neither ‘/usr/bin/gcc’ nor ‘/usr/bin/c++’ are provided by a single, binary package. Each is provided by packages, that depend uniquely on other packages, that are also not in the repositories.

Further, once the power-user has in fact installed binaries, after making sure that none of their file-names overlap, he must also create a system of Debian Alternatives, that allow him to switch between compilers easily. The problem with that is the fact that because, under Debian / Stretch, no provision was ever made by Package Maintainers for alternatives to exist, automatic mechanisms have also not been provided, to install ‘Link Groups’. The Link Groups ‘cc’, ‘cpp’ and ‘c++’ exist, but only in such a way as to provide one executable each.

As I was doing my best to install the Link Groups, I made a mistake, which simply over-wrote ‘/usr/bin/gcc’ with a different symlink, and which therefore forced me to (1) delete the link-group, and (2) reinstall GCC 6.3 from the package manager. After that, a new attempt to set up the link-groups succeeded:


dirk@Phosphene:~$su Password: root@Phosphene:/home/dirk# update-alternatives --config cc There are 2 choices for the alternative cc (providing /usr/bin/cc). Selection Path Priority Status ------------------------------------------------------------ * 0 /usr/bin/gcc-6 20 auto mode 1 /usr/bin/gcc-4.8 10 manual mode 2 /usr/bin/gcc-6 20 manual mode Press to keep the current choice[*], or type selection number: root@Phosphene:/home/dirk# update-alternatives --config cpp There are 2 choices for the alternative cpp (providing /usr/bin/cpp). Selection Path Priority Status ------------------------------------------------------------ * 0 /usr/bin/cpp-6 20 auto mode 1 /usr/bin/cpp-4.8 10 manual mode 2 /usr/bin/cpp-6 20 manual mode Press to keep the current choice[*], or type selection number: root@Phosphene:/home/dirk# update-alternatives --config c++ There are 2 choices for the alternative c++ (providing /usr/bin/c++). Selection Path Priority Status ------------------------------------------------------------ * 0 /usr/bin/g++-6 20 auto mode 1 /usr/bin/g++-4.8 10 manual mode 2 /usr/bin/g++-6 20 manual mode Press to keep the current choice[*], or type selection number: root@Phosphene:/home/dirk# exit exit dirk@Phosphene:~$



Note: The first link above, named ‘cc’, has a corresponding slave-link named ‘gcc’, thereby forming the only real ‘Link Group’. The others are just plain Links.

I am reasonably certain that none of these link-groups are broken. But what my reader should be able to infer from what I’ve written, is that It would be a hare-brained attempt, to duplicate what I’ve done, entirely based on this blog posting.

(Edit 5/03/2019, 11h45 : )

Just to prove how hare-brained this idea really is, I just uninstalled the alternative compilers, and replaced them with the GCC / CPP / C++ tool-chain, version 4.9, and made that part of the update-alternatives system as above! (:3)

(End of Edit.)

So what does this provide me with (hopefully)?

(Updated 5/02/2019, 12h15 … )