Qt6.8.1 building from source - Unable to remove file: error: (32)The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process
-
Thanks for the hint, I'll give that a try now, feedback shortly...
-
So I did a clean git clone and submodule update just for qtbase.
git clone --branch v6.8.1 https://code.qt.io/qt/qt5.git qt-sources
qt-sources/configure -init-submodules -submodules qtbase
mkdir qt-build
cd qt-build
../qt-sources/configure -init-submodules -submodules qtbase
cmake --build . --parallelI'm back to the unable to remove file:
This is a company machine running threatlocker but the blocked log is empty during the build (in fact it's empty full stop).
I don't seem to have any issue building the numerous project libs on this PC using cmake.
Any other ideas of the cause looking at the above steps and cmd output?
-
So I did a clean git clone and submodule update just for qtbase.
git clone --branch v6.8.1 https://code.qt.io/qt/qt5.git qt-sources
qt-sources/configure -init-submodules -submodules qtbase
mkdir qt-build
cd qt-build
../qt-sources/configure -init-submodules -submodules qtbase
cmake --build . --parallelI'm back to the unable to remove file:
This is a company machine running threatlocker but the blocked log is empty during the build (in fact it's empty full stop).
I don't seem to have any issue building the numerous project libs on this PC using cmake.
Any other ideas of the cause looking at the above steps and cmd output?
Just for the sake of testing, what happens if you limit the parallelism to 1 ?
-
Hi @SGaist , I'll give it a go, feedback soon, thanks.
-
Hi @SGaist , so it does appear to have built:
I'll make the same process but with more submodules toe be sure, then I'd say this can be marked as a work-around to seeing such a failure I would expect this to be a machine dependent issue.
Thoughts?
Thanks for the support so far... -
The next thing I would try is adding more parallelism until it breaks again.
-
Hi @SGaist , just an update that I can build all sub-modules with 'parallelism 1'.
I'll up the concurrent processes next but I assume that this is machine dependent...
Are my further testing results required or should this be marked as solved as anyone now reading this thread can attempt the same steps and experiment with how many concurrent processes suit their machine?
-
Your feedback would be very welcome (at least I am interested in the result of your experimentations).
You can mark the thread as solved since you have a workaround but keeping it up to date would be a nice plus.
-
Hi @SGaist , I'll give it a go as a background task in the coming days.
Thanks for the support (and @Christian-Ehrlicher also), it's much appreciated. -
Hi @SGaist ,
I tried building with multiple jobs starting at 10, none worked on this machine - so only 'parallelism 1' worked.
Interestingly this is only a problem building MinGW, MSVC was working with no specific parallelism value.
gcc --version
gcc.exe (Rev2, Built by MSYS2 project) 14.2.0 -
B Ben Campbell-Wallis has marked this topic as solved on
-
B Ben Campbell-Wallis has marked this topic as solved on
-
Intriguing !
Thanks for the feedback -
Sure is, I can only assume I've hit a combination of hardware/complier/toolchain that exposes a bug somewhere - I may follow this up with GNU on this issue, though reading their guidelines for bugs they may never look at it :-)
I've added my PC spec as this may help others searching for similar issues in the future:
OS Name
-> Microsoft Windows 11 Pro
Version
-> 10.0.26100 Build 26100
System Model
-> Precision 5690
Processor
-> Intel(R) Core(TM) Ultra 7 165H, 3800 Mhz, 16 Core(s), 22 Logical Processor(s)
Installed Physical Memory (RAM)
-> 32.0 GB
Drives size:
-> 1.86 TB (2,045,443,567,616 bytes)gcc --version
gcc.exe (Rev2, Built by MSYS2 project) 14.2.0 -
B Ben Campbell-Wallis referenced this topic on
