[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev LYMainLoop.c -- gcc signal 11, egcs-1.1.2
From: |
T.E.Dickey |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev LYMainLoop.c -- gcc signal 11, egcs-1.1.2 |
Date: |
Sun, 17 Oct 1999 07:39:11 -0400 (EDT) |
>
> On Sat, Oct 16, 1999, T.E.Dickey wrote:
> > >
> > > Is anyone else having any problems compiling LYMainLoop.c in dev.12?
> > >
> > > gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DLOCALEDIR=\"/usr/local/share/locale\" -I. -I..
> > > -Ichrtrans -I./chrtrans -I.. -I../src -I../WWW/Library/Implementation
> > > -O2 -DLINUX -c ./LYMainLoop.c
> > > gcc: Internal compiler error: program cpp got fatal signal 11
> > > make[1]: *** [LYMainLoop.o] Error 1
> > > make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/pk/lynx/2.8.3dev.12/src'
> > > make: *** [all] Error 2
> > > address@hidden ~/lynx/2.8.3dev.12]$ gcc -v
> > > Reading specs from
> > > /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-linux-gnu/egcs-2.91.66/specs
> > > gcc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 release)
I'm building with that version right now, to check (seems to work - but I'll
try with your configuration settings).
> > > address@hidden ~/lynx/2.8.3dev.12]$ uname -a
> > > Linux odin 2.2.12 #3 Thu Sep 2 06:56:14 EDT 1999 i586 unknown
> [...]
> > > I can include my cfg_defs.h or lynx_cfg.h if anyone is curious. I
> > > doubt this will be debuggable, but figured it might be a data point
> > > worth something.
> >
> > The only way I can see to debug it is to chop pieces out of LYMainLoop.c
> > until the problem goes away - to see what's causing the problem. I saw
> > some comment recently that indicated egcs has some problems with code that
> > compiles fine with the gcc versions.
>
> Any suggestions on which functions to start with? Probably the main
> loop. Also, I just noticed in what I have up there -- it says "cpp"
yes - or the functions "handle_LYK_xxx" that I split-out of the main loop.
That would be possibly better (since chopping out the main loop would leave
a lot of orphaned private functions, while chopping out the functions themselves
would just leave a lot of implicit declarations).
> got signal 11, not gcc. Maybe that's what usually comes up, I don't
> have any old compile failures to compare to.
>
> I'll try that.
>
>
> --
> Hawkeye's Conclusion:
> It's not easy to play the clown
> when you've got to run the whole circus.
--
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey