From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24358: 25.1.50; re-search-forward errors with "Variable binding depth exceeds max-specpdl-size" Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 09:52:34 +0300 Message-ID: <83wphif1zh.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87twe6sx2g.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <87eg51ng4r.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <87k2djwumn.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83h98nidvd.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg3rvtsf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2dihpm9.fsf@gnu.org> <8760p2wzgj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttyhhzu.fsf@gnu.org> <871szqwu51.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87vax2v9vu.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1475996000 10750 195.159.176.226 (9 Oct 2016 06:53:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 06:53:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 24358@debbugs.gnu.org, peder@klingenberg.no To: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 09 08:53:16 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7z1-0002BI-22 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 08:53:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43321 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yz-0005dU-KL for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:53:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44312) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yu-0005dO-49 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:53:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yo-0005eg-OA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:53:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43039) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yo-0005ea-Kq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:53:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yo-0005xm-F6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:53:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 06:53:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 24358 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 24358-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B24358.147599598122915 (code B ref 24358); Sun, 09 Oct 2016 06:53:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24358) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Oct 2016 06:53:01 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49229 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yn-0005xX-0y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:53:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53294) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7ym-0005xJ-36 for 24358@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:53:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yc-0005a8-GL for 24358@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:52:54 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:59064) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yC-0005OB-Go; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:52:24 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3556 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bt7yB-0006sj-OI; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 02:52:24 -0400 In-reply-to: <87vax2v9vu.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> (npostavs@users.sourceforge.net) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:124255 Archived-At: > From: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net > Cc: 24358@debbugs.gnu.org, peder@klingenberg.no > Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2016 16:55:17 -0400 > > > r_alloc_sbrk? What OS is this? We only use ralloc.c on a handful of > > them, as of Emacs 25. > > Uh, it's GNU/Linux (Arch), so not too obscure I would think. I thought no GNU/Linux system uses ralloc.c, but maybe I was mistaken. > Where is the decision to use ralloc made? It was always a fallback, for systems that don't have better ways of allocating system memory. MS-Windows was using it until 25.1. > Maybe something went wrong in my configure? I guess configure somehow decides that gmalloc.c should be used on your system (as opposed to the system-provided malloc), and then ralloc.c is a necessity. Look in your config.log for any test related to malloc or something that has "malloc" as its substring. In any case, this doesn't invalidate the bug, of course.