From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Eli Zaretskii" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: DJGPP only dumps with USE_LISP_UNION_TYPE ?? Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 07:01:52 +0200 Message-ID: <01c4c619$Blat.v2.2.2$5f981160@zahav.net.il> References: <01c4c514$Blat.v2.2.2$ca305740@zahav.net.il> <418EB423.9030601@swipnet.se> <01c4c56a$Blat.v2.2.2$96dd3060@zahav.net.il> <418FD9C3.7080507@swipnet.se> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1099976968 25953 80.91.229.6 (9 Nov 2004 05:09:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 05:09:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 09 06:09:14 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CROFm-0003Xb-00 for ; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 06:09:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CROO9-0006gc-8N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:17:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CROO2-0006gL-6I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:17:46 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CROO1-0006g2-FW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:17:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CROO1-0006fz-DL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:17:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.24] (helo=legolas.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CROFD-0004tR-GB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:08:39 -0500 Original-Received: from zaretski ([80.230.149.108]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.3-GR) with ESMTP id DBE46033 (AUTH halo1); Tue, 9 Nov 2004 07:07:33 +0200 (IST) Original-To: "Jan D." X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 2.2.2 In-reply-to: <418FD9C3.7080507@swipnet.se> (jan.h.d@swipnet.se) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:29619 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:29619 > Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:40:35 +0100 > From: "Jan D." > CC: emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > > >>d:/djgpp/bin/ld.exe: temacs: warning: .text: line number overflow: 0x11102 > 0xffff > > > > > > This warning is harmless. It is printed by ld because Emacs is > > compiled with COFF debug info (the -gcoff option to GCC; I never got > > to making unexec work for DJGPP with the DWARF-2 debug info), and COFF > > debug info cannot have more than 64K source-line records, the > > structures that tell the debugger what is the address of each source > > line in the binary. > > > > Are you saying that building with USE_LSB_TAG undefined does not > > produce this warning? That would be extremely strange, as I don't > > think the build without USE_LSB_TAG can reduce the number of source > > lines by 1103 hex (=4355 decimal) lines, which is the difference > > between 0x11102 and 0xffff. > > Yes, this is the case. Interesting. Curiously enough, my builds (on Windows 98) cite a much larger number: d:/usr/djgpp/bin/ld.exe: temacs: warning: .text: line number overflow: 0x1128a > 0xffff > Emacs fatal error: buffer.c:4944: assertion failed: XTYPE > (&buffer_defaults) == 0 > > In gdb I see that &buffer_local_symbols which is what > Vbuffer_local_symbols uses, isn't aligned to an even 8 either. These > are aligned to an even 4. So DECL_ALIGN isn't working in this > configuration (?). Sounds strange. Could you write a short test program that demonstrates whether DECL_ALIGN works, and see if it fails on XP? (I could run it on my machine to see if it works on 98, which I think it does.) If DECL_ALIGN doesn't work, we certainly cannot use LSB tags in the XP build. We could then make the test program part of config.bat to DTRT at build time. Please also upgrade to a newer GCC version (I use 3.3.3), in case there's some alignment bug in your version. TIA