From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: weird defadvice bug with byte-compilation] Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:51:15 -0500 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1134698286 27844 80.91.229.2 (16 Dec 2005 01:58:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 01:58:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 16 02:58:04 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1En4oD-0007Xb-IW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 02:54:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1En4os-0006D9-TU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:55:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1En4mm-000595-Gq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:53:28 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1En4mk-000582-QY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:53:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1En4mk-00057d-CQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:53:26 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1En4p5-0001jU-Kk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:55:51 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1En4kd-0006ra-St; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:51:15 -0500 Original-To: Eli Zaretskii In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Thu, 15 Dec 2005 06:46:05 +0200) 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: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:47837 Archived-At: > This means the stack is corrupted. We need to find out why and how, > because that could be the most important bug. No, the stack is not corrupted. The problem is that latest versions of GDB modified their way of analyzing function prologues, and that caused major regressions in stack backtraces on x86, especially with latest versions of GCC. That has been discussed extensively on the GDB mailing list during the last year. GDB 6.4 is supposed to improve on that, but I don't yet have its Windows port. In that case, with a breakpoint at x_y_to_hpos_vpos do you see more stack trace info?