[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#24358: 25.1.50; re-search-forward errors with "Variable binding dept

From: Sam Halliday
Subject: bug#24358: 25.1.50; re-search-forward errors with "Variable binding depth exceeds max-specpdl-size"
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 09:57:21 +0100

I don't know which alloc my build is using, I'm on archlinux and I
expect it will use the same impl that was causing the problems earlier
in the thread.

I also got the problem on the tip of emacs-25, but it's hard for me to
see which commits are relevant to this ticket because they've all been
squashed into the mainline instead of merged in.

I'm afraid I'm travelling today and cannot run these commands, I will
try to do this shortly.  How do I work out the command that make is

On 23 October 2016 at 07:41, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
>> From: address@hidden
>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>,  address@hidden
>> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 18:46:43 -0400
>> Sam Halliday <address@hidden> writes:
>> > Processing OKURI-NASI entries ...
>> > processed 10% ...
>> > processed 20% ...
>> > Args out of range: #("崎/
>> > かん" 0 5 (charset japanese-jisx0208)), -6, nil
>> > make[2]: *** [Makefile:142: ../lisp/leim/ja-dic/ja-dic.el] Error 255
>> > make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/fommil/build/emacs-git/emacs/leim'
>> > make[1]: *** [Makefile:320: leim] Error 2
>> > make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/fommil/build/emacs-git/emacs/lisp'
>> > make: *** [Makefile:385: lisp] Error 2
>> >
>> I can't reproduce this.
> Neither can I.
> Sam, does your build use ralloc.c?  Also, are you sure this change
> causes the problem?  Note that Paul pushed a follow-up change after
> that: do you have it in your tree?
>> I did a 'make extraclean' in lisp/leim, and
>> then ran 'make', ja-dic.el was generated without error:
> Sam, please run the failed command under GDB, put a breakpoint in
> args_out_of_range, and show the C and Lisp backtrace when this error
> happens.  (If args_out_of_range is called more than once, then please
> make sure you are showing the correct instance, e.g. by looking at the
> "processed NN%" lines.)

reply via email to

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