[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Issue 1997 in lilypond: segfault in tablature-negative-fret.ly

From: lilypond
Subject: Re: Issue 1997 in lilypond: segfault in tablature-negative-fret.ly
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:23:54 +0000

Comment #25 on issue 1997 by address@hidden: segfault in tablature-negative-fret.ly

If you look at the GCC bug URL given in comment 17, you'll see that Jakub Jelinek has given a self-contained example that is supposed to correlate with the bug.

This example is written in pure C. Since I don't really have the expertise to judge whether it really is the same bug, after some thought I'd feel more comfortable staying with a version-based check for now.

If you take a look at the gcc patch that Jakub claims fixes the problem, you'll see that it is in gcc/calls.cc and it does appear to be in an architecture _independent_ part of the source. That Graham's version of gcc on x86_64 did not fail in the same manner for this reason would not seem to imply that it won't fail under different circumstances related to structure arguments.

Since this is rather ugly to diagnose and the backtraces basically are useless for that purpose as well, I would tend to make my patch specify the workaround option _independent_ of the architecture, to be on the safe side. Because _if_ any x86_64 bugs do appear, I don't have the hardware to diagnose them, and they will look different from the bugs we had on i686.

Sounds reasonable?

If so, I'll take the architecture check out of my patch.

reply via email to

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