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: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 06:14:13 +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> <85veh7o305.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1173672862 28619 80.91.229.12 (12 Mar 2007 04:14:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 04:14:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 12 05:14:14 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 1HQbvK-0006J3-7L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 05:14:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HQbvw-00045Z-8D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Mar 2007 23:14:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HQbvl-00045F-9d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:14:41 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HQbvj-00044y-Et for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:14:40 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HQbvj-00044v-BZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Mar 2007 23:14:39 -0500 Original-Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il ([213.8.233.22]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HQbv2-0002WZ-N3; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:13:56 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-203-162.inter.net.il [80.230.203.162]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id GGY18454 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 12 Mar 2007 06:13:52 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <85veh7o305.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:59:38 +0100) 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:67765 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: David Kastrup > Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:59:38 +0100 > > >> > >> Well, how about explicitly disabling a few debugging-unfriendly > >> options when we are compiling with -g? > > > > We've been through that in this thread: Miles suggested that a day or > > two ago. To which I replied that the GCC documentation doesn't give > > you any useful information about which options to turn off to get a > > reasonably debuggable program. > > So because we can't expect to get perfection with 100% certainty, we > should do nothing at all? I don't think I meant that, but I don't understand what you are suggesting we do, and how. Please explain.