From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: My Emacs unicode 2 crash again when I do some *Replace String (M-%)*, I give the debug informations under gdb in the attachments. Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:08:06 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20070306063056.GA21948@debian-testing-hy.localdomain> <86zm6q5upr.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <17902.9556.720278.162036@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <85bqizpiu6.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <871wjvc7or.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1173737305 12402 80.91.229.12 (12 Mar 2007 22:08:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:08:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 12 23:08:18 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HQsgi-0005df-9u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 23:08:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HQshP-0006Ws-NB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:08:59 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HQshE-0006Wl-BT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 18:08:48 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HQshB-0006WX-VJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 18:08:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HQshB-0006WT-Pl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:08:45 -0500 Original-Received: from romy.inter.net.il ([213.8.233.24]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HQsgT-0006ZA-K1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 18:08:01 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-229-113-116.inter.net.il [84.229.113.116]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id HJJ62624 (AUTH halo1); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:07:48 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <871wjvc7or.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) X-detected-kernel: FreeBSD 4.7-5.2 (or MacOS X 10.2-10.4) (2) 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:67822 Archived-At: > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" > Cc: David Kastrup , > Eli Zaretskii , > Stefan Monnier , > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:11:32 +0900 > > Seems to me that a lot of projects would benefit from this. Why not > codify the knowledge that we (well, "you", I know nothing about debug > vs optimization interference except that it exists) have in an aclocal > snippet, with a view to eventually including it in Autoconf? The problem is, again, that the list of -fxxx options that, if disabled, will make the program much easier to debug, is not known except to the few GCC developers. So I don't think we know what to put in aclocal. If you mean to build a configure-time test that will try each -fxxx option and somehow establish whether it does or does not disrupt debugging, then I think this is too large a job, and it will constantly bitrot due to -fxxx options being removed and added as GCC is developed. Or maybe you mean something else?