I trust you have read the Boost.Math section
"If and How to Build a Boost.Math Library, and its Examples and Tests"
It's most unusual to want/need to build a library - Boost.Math is most
efficiently used as
header-only.
I'm trying to run an "as basic" build as possible, which includes building boost math as a library. There are a few other libraries which similarly have "optional" build libraries, I don't know how many of them by default are built (I believe MPI is the main library which isn't built by default).
However the tests should run, and the test suite at
http://www.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/math.html
and specifically the test using 4.8
MinGW-w64-4.8 jc-bell.com
Boost Regression Test, Windows 7 x64, MinGW-w64, gcc 4.8
are showing mostly green.
mostly != all :P I haven't tried running the tests without the -j flag yet (stop on first error), so i don't know how many tests failed, and it's possible that multiple compile errors/crashes could be present in a single test. I don't have some "automatic terminate compiler on crash" script, so every compile error means I have to click the mouse (which is more than I want to). The test log suggests there's some script for running tests with an error timeout, I'll try to see if I can get that working so I can get the full report.
However it is showing a few unexpected failures (compared to previous gcc versions), for example:
Test output: MinGW-w64-4.8 jc-bell.com - math - test_remez / gcc-mingw- 4.8.0 Rev 84971 / Sun, 07 Jul 2013 14:27:48 +0000 Compile [2013-07-08 00:15:42 UTC]: fail
"g++" -ftemplate-depth-128 -O0 -fno-inline -Wall -g -Winvalid-pch - DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_BUILD_PCH_ENABLED -DBOOST_TEST_NO_AUTO_LINK=1 -DBOOST_UBLAS_UNSUPPORTED_COMPILER=0 -I"F:\boost\GCC\trunk\results\boost\bin.v2\libs\math\test\gcc-mingw- 4.8.0\debug\link-static" -I".." -I"..\libs\math\test" -c -o
"F:\boost\GCC\trunk\results\boost\bin.v2\libs\math\test\test_remez.test\gcc- mingw-4.8.0\debug\link-s
tatic\test_remez.o" "..\libs\math\test\test_remez.cpp"
which is another similarly unhelpful message (as are the others).
So, to me, this looks like a compiler problem.
(And your StackOverflow link above also suggests the same).
Please report if you make any sense of/fix this.
I concur, it does appear to be a compiler problem.