[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [h-e-w] Current word on binaries

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: [h-e-w] Current word on binaries
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 14:06:09 +0200

> From: Harald Maier <harald@maierh.de>
> Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:33:50 +0100
> >
> > I tried it too and I found too that something goes wrong. 'emacs -q'
> > works fine, but when I tried to load my .emacs it displays the 'Emacs
> > Abort Dialog' and complains that 'A fatal error has occured!'
> I did some additional tests and it looks that the problem occurs only
> if emacs-21.3 is compiled with a latest cygwin gcc. I did two test
> with the emacs-21.3.tar.gz from March last year and the actual tarball
> from ftp.gnu.org. On both sources the same happens, so it does not
> look that something has changed since the compromise of the server.
> Afterwards I compiled emacs with MSVC and the result is that all works
> as expected. Currently I have no clue why the problem with gcc
> happens.

What version of GCC is the one that produces a bad binary?  What does
"gcc --version" says?

Can someone run Emacs under GDB and see where exactly does it abort?

One possible idea to check is to use lower level of optimizations when
building Emacs, like -O0 or -O1.  Can someone see if that produces a
good binary?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]