From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Ok, somebody give me a clue.
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:23:32 -0500
Message-ID: <E1D6Rwy-00056I-17@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <x54qfwki43.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <m37jks93ub.fsf@kfs-l.imdomain.dk>
	<x5psykfzm3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1109765159 15749 80.91.229.2 (2 Mar 2005 12:05:59 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:05:59 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 02 13:05:58 2005
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D6Sbi-0002xk-N2
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:05:40 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D6SuT-0004J7-9q
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:25:01 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D6SLe-0003cy-Rl
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:49:04 -0500
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D6SLb-0003bX-M7
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:49:00 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D6SLZ-0003Rs-L9
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:48:58 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D6Rwy-000464-Er
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:23:32 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1D6Rwy-00056I-17; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:23:32 -0500
Original-To: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
In-reply-to: <x5psykfzm3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (message from David Kastrup on
	Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:55:32 +0100)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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
X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34054
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34054

    If I instead use

    #define RECORD_INPUT do { ; } while (0)

    it works.  So either gcc is broken with regard to local labels, or it
    produces something from them which confuses the dumper.

The way to debug a problem like that is by looking at the assembler
code and seeing if it corresponds correctly to the source.

It is important to do this, because if GCC has a bug, we need to fix
it.  However, is there a later GCC you could try?  Maybe the bug is
fixed already.