* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2)
@ 2003-05-12 14:40 Hin-Tak Leung
2003-05-12 15:22 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
That's a somewhat time-wasting question - if I am on linux with
gcc 3.2 glibc 2.3.x and Xfree 4.3.0 most certainly the linux
distribution I use come with a more recent version of emacs or xemacs.
(actually both). And my original post mentioned that I built emacs-19
successfully on a Xfree 4.1/glibc 2.0/2.1 system as well,
and that binary still works on the current system.
I want to use a elisp script called cemacs (for Chinese inputs)
but unfortunately the inclusion the MULE (Multi-lingual Extension)
since version 20 has broken it. It does continue to work with
xemacs-21.x, but that's besides the point.
Now back to my question: why emacs 19.34 segfault when built against
glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0? And please stick to the question... -
and please do not ask why I don't switch to xemacs, or use MULE.
Just to anticipate these two questions: MULE is no where as good
as cemacs (unfortunately, and please don't start an argument on why I
should use MULE even though it is inferior), and xemacs is too
bloated for my taste. So I would really rather try to keep using
a small installation of 19.34 (in addition to emacs 21 which came
with the distro), or port cemacs forward to emacs 21 (quite major
work, probably). The 2nd option is probably better for long
term, but until it is done, I will continue to try to build emacs
19 on current systems... and I would really like to find out
why it won't build.
==============
Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
> I am trying to build emacs-19.34 against glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0
> on linux with gcc 3.2. The binary works with -nw switch, but
> when I run it without -nw, it segfaults with Fatal Error(11).
> So it seems to be an X-related problem.
have you tried using a more recent version of emacs? emacs-21.3.1 is
what i use and it compiled with gcc-3.2.3 on XFree86-4.3 no problems
(glibc-3.2.3) using using Lesstif-0.93.41. unless there is some reason
you WANT to use an older version?
cheers,
Sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 14:40 emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 15:22 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 16:12 ` emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung [not found] ` <20030512164103.1607f814.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk> 2003-05-14 13:48 ` Richard Stallman 2 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: Now back to my question: why emacs 19.34 segfault when built against glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0? And please stick to the question... - and please do not ask why I don't switch to xemacs, or use MULE. in this case probably no one can answer your question w/o your investing effort into debugging the matter locally. as well, probably few people are interested in helping you if you scold them. of course, there is the option of hiring someone to work on this problem for you, in which case you can treat them as befits the conventional (in your business sphere) employer / employee relationship, and clearly set out in a written contract. you may consult the etc/SERVICES file to find someone in your vicinity, or further away on the net. thi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 15:22 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 16:12 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 17:18 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel This is going more and more off-topic. My initial post was fairly specific, and the one reply I got (asking why I don't use a more current version) was already somewhat off-topic, because I did describe my system in much detail and it would have been obvious even at that point I had a (not yet disclosed) reason not to use a more current version. But unless of course, you would rather me switching to xemacs-21 instead... (cemacs still continue to work under it, as the emacs/xemacs split occurred before version 19, and the xemacs folks are less agressive in making incompatible changes - which unfortunately is also the reason of xemacs's bloatedness; however I believe MULE is going into xemacs-24 or thereabout's so the issue will need to be addressed one day, even if I switch to xemacs). FWIW, I did search through the archive for "Fatal Error(11)". And it seems to be the message for a general memory access error, similar to the gcc's SIG 11 (probably identical to...), or the rather uninformative "segmentation fault" whenever any program dies; and fatal error 11 can occur under a lot of totally unrelated conditions, but mostly to do with how undump works, memory aligment, etc. So my guess is that it is probably going to be very sensitive to how my glibc, Xfree86, or my gcc were configured and built and any patches were applied to them; and there *might* be a chance that a future system upgrade *might* magically fixes it. In any case, the reality is that I only need emacs-19 to work in the "-nw" enviroment for cemacs, and figuring out why it segfaults under Xfree86 is a somewhat academic issue... but I would still like an answer, an explanation, or (gasp) a possible fix. OTOH, if I really want a "currently supported" emacs for my purpose, I could switch to xemacs-21 immediately and that would give me a couple of years to look for other alternatives... Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > > Now back to my question: why emacs 19.34 segfault when built against > glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0? And please stick to the question... - and > please do not ask why I don't switch to xemacs, or use MULE. > > in this case probably no one can answer your question w/o your investing > effort into debugging the matter locally. as well, probably few people > are interested in helping you if you scold them. > > of course, there is the option of hiring someone to work on this problem > for you, in which case you can treat them as befits the conventional (in > your business sphere) employer / employee relationship, and clearly set > out in a written contract. you may consult the etc/SERVICES file to > find someone in your vicinity, or further away on the net. > > thi > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 16:12 ` emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 17:18 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 17:51 ` emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 17:18 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: but I would still like an answer, an explanation, or (gasp) a possible fix. you are getting answers. you are getting (oblique) explanations. if these are not to your liking, what adaptability can you demonstrate to elicit the preferred results? thi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 17:18 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 17:51 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 18:15 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel (Sigh) This is getting more and more off-topic. You know, earlier posts to similar questions (why does it segfault, "fatal error 11") in the archive had instead concentrated on the issue at hand e.g. in the archive around Jun 2002 there was an explicit patch (which I already use to get the compilation going), and other people over the past 10 years' archive had suggested running gdb on core dumps, doing a strace, etc on the "Fatal Error 11" problem. So far neither you nor "supposedly helpful" samuel had even suggested either gdb or strace. or trying to get a core dump. If you want my adaptability, I guess I would like to offer a gdb back trace or something like that eventually, when I get round to do it. Can you help debugging a gdb back trace? (I would really like a straight forward "yes" or "no", rather than going into further philosophical discussions). Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > > but I would still like an answer, an explanation, or (gasp) a > possible fix. > > you are getting answers. you are getting (oblique) explanations. if > these are not to your liking, what adaptability can you demonstrate to > elicit the preferred results? > > thi > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 17:51 ` emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 18:15 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 19:00 ` Hin-Tak Leung 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: So far neither you nor "supposedly helpful" samuel had even suggested either gdb or strace. or trying to get a core dump. it looks like you have stumbled upon this debugging approach on your own, in any case, w/o needless prompting. that's good to see! If you want my adaptability, I guess I would like to offer a gdb back trace or something like that eventually, when I get round to do it. Can you help debugging a gdb back trace? (I would really like a straight forward "yes" or "no", rather than going into further philosophical discussions). well i would really like to say "yes" or "no" straight-forwardly rather than having to debug your PR problems first, but all i can offer at this time are these questions: (1) how can anyone definitively answer anything on something you have not yet revealed? (2) what is the root cause of any problem besides philosophical misalignment of some sort? thi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 18:15 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 19:00 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 20:36 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel (Sigh). I would have been a lot happier if one of you had replied with "get me a gdb back strace" than having to digress to lengthy philosphical discussion on reasons to use an older version, or resorting to foul languages. As I said, I would prefer a "yes" or "no" to the gdb debug question. It isn't to difficult to answer either: (1) "possibly, depending on how deep the problem is; can't promise" (2) "Sorry no, no eperience with gdb whatsoever" But you are trying to draw into philosophical discussion again. (I guess that's still better than the "get a f*cking life" or "cheeky f*cker" replies) I suppose the inclusion of MULE and breaking backward compatibility is the root cause - and my not wanting to use it. But this is somewhat irrelevant. Other people may have other reasons for wanting to run an old copy of emacs on current systems, and a solution may be useful to others. The preference to use cemacs versus MULE may be a very small minority, but I don't think the same can be said about emacs 19 versus emacs 21 in general. In a way, MULE has exactly the same strength and weakness as the general emacs "Swiss Army Knife" philosophy: it is useful for linguists who want to do a lot of languages within a single document, but it doesn't work particularly well for any one given language. And a 30MB MULE installation versus 50kB cemacs - a trimmed emacs 19 installation in parallel/addition to emacs 21 is only 10MB. If I had sounded impatient, I had not resort to verbal violence as some others did. Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > > So far neither you nor "supposedly helpful" samuel had even > suggested either gdb or strace. or trying to get a core > dump. > > it looks like you have stumbled upon this debugging approach on > your own, in any case, w/o needless prompting. that's good to > see! > > If you want my adaptability, I guess I would like to offer > a gdb back trace or something like that eventually, when > I get round to do it. Can you help debugging a gdb back trace? > > (I would really like a straight forward "yes" or "no", rather > than going into further philosophical discussions). > > well i would really like to say "yes" or "no" straight-forwardly > rather than having to debug your PR problems first, but all i > can offer at this time are these questions: (1) how can anyone > definitively answer anything on something you have not yet > revealed? (2) what is the root cause of any problem besides > philosophical misalignment of some sort? > > thi > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 19:00 ` Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 20:36 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 22:11 ` Hin-Tak Leung [not found] ` <mailman.6068.1052777215.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 20:36 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: (Sigh). I would have been a lot happier if one of you had replied with "get me a gdb back strace" than having to digress to lengthy philosphical discussion on reasons to use an older version, or resorting to foul languages. although it is encouraging that you know yourself well enough to say this, i confess to not feeling comfortable ordering you about like an employee. these lengthy discussions surely would be better replaced by some concrete information (as "concrete" as information can be ;-), it seems you're saying. the reasons for using this version (or any version for that matter) are not really germaine to debugging the problem, you also note. As I said, I would prefer a "yes" or "no" to the gdb debug question. It isn't to difficult to answer either: (1) "possibly, depending on how deep the problem is; can't promise" (2) "Sorry no, no eperience with gdb whatsoever" what if some people on the list respond (1) and some people respond (2) -- what have you gained and/or lost by this exercise? But you are trying to draw into philosophical discussion again. (I guess that's still better than the "get a f*cking life" or "cheeky f*cker" replies) a personal quirk, no doubt: all discussion is philosophical to me, even those involving hard bits of free software artifact (both pre- and post- core dump ;-). If I had sounded impatient, I had not resort to verbal violence as some others did. sometimes the sudden move is easy to interpret as both violent and beautiful, and sometimes funny and sometimes sad. where there is room for interpretation there is room for misunderstanding (and bugs!). thi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 20:36 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2003-05-12 22:11 ` Hin-Tak Leung [not found] ` <mailman.6068.1052777215.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel Here is the long awaited gdb back trace and strace. It seems to die at the same place that emacs-21/AIX dies if it is run over a slow dial-up connection (there were two different patches for that, one of them by Mr Stallman himself no less, if I remember correctly) - probably not related. Thought I'd mention this just in case. ========================== > gdb emacs-19.34 GNU gdb 5.3 Copyright 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc. GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain conditions. Type "show copying" to see the conditions. There is absolutely no warranty for GDB. Type "show warranty" for details. This GDB was configured as "i386-slackware-linux"... (gdb) run Starting program: /usr/local/bin/emacs-19.34 Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x400908b3 in XtInitializeWidgetClass () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 (gdb) bt #0 0x400908b3 in XtInitializeWidgetClass () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 #1 0x400916a2 in _XtCreateWidget () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 #2 0x400917c5 in XtCreateWidget () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 #3 0x08075141 in x_window () #4 0x08076228 in Fx_create_frame () #5 0x080c65cb in Ffuncall () #6 0x080db3f3 in Fbyte_code () #7 0x080c6a8a in funcall_lambda () #8 0x080c64dc in Ffuncall () #9 0x080db3f3 in Fbyte_code () #10 0x080c6a8a in funcall_lambda () #11 0x080c64dc in Ffuncall () #12 0x080db3f3 in Fbyte_code () #13 0x080c6a8a in funcall_lambda () #14 0x080c64dc in Ffuncall () #15 0x080db3f3 in Fbyte_code () #16 0x080c6a8a in funcall_lambda () #17 0x080c64dc in Ffuncall () #18 0x080db3f3 in Fbyte_code () #19 0x080c6a8a in funcall_lambda () #20 0x080c687e in apply_lambda () #21 0x080c5564 in Feval () #22 0x0807fa43 in top_level_2 () #23 0x080c47ac in internal_condition_case () #24 0x0807fa80 in top_level_1 () #25 0x080c431b in internal_catch () #26 0x0807f9ae in command_loop () #27 0x0807f623 in recursive_edit_1 () #28 0x0807f6f8 in Frecursive_edit () #29 0x0807e5e5 in main () #30 0x40240bb4 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 (gdb) ================= The last few lines of strace: ================= open("/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/icons/default/index.theme", O_RDONLY) = 3 fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0755, st_size=27, ...}) = 0 old_mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x401c3000 read(3, "[Icon Theme]\nInherits=core\n", 4096) = 27 close(3) = 0 munmap(0x401c3000, 4096) = 0 --- SIGSEGV (Segmentation fault) --- rt_sigaction(SIGSEGV, {SIG_DFL}, {0x807dbf0, [], SA_RESTART|0x4000000}, 8) = 0 getpgrp() = 11004 ioctl(0, 0x540f, [11004]) = 0 write(2, "Fatal error (11).", 17) = 17 rt_sigaction(SIGIO, {SIG_IGN}, {0x80845b0, [], SA_RESTART|0x4000000}, 8) = 0 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, [SEGV 35 43 44 45 46 47 52 53 60 61], [SEGV], 8) = 0 getpid() = 11005 kill(11005, SIGSEGV) = 0 --- SIGSEGV (Segmentation fault) --- +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++ ================================ Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > > (Sigh). I would have been a lot happier if one of you had > replied with "get me a gdb back strace" than having to digress > to lengthy philosphical discussion on reasons to use an > older version, or resorting to foul languages. > > although it is encouraging that you know yourself well enough to say > this, i confess to not feeling comfortable ordering you about like an > employee. these lengthy discussions surely would be better replaced by > some concrete information (as "concrete" as information can be ;-), it > seems you're saying. the reasons for using this version (or any version > for that matter) are not really germaine to debugging the problem, you > also note. > > As I said, I would prefer a "yes" or "no" to the gdb debug > question. It isn't to difficult to answer either: > (1) "possibly, depending on how deep the problem is; can't promise" > (2) "Sorry no, no eperience with gdb whatsoever" > > what if some people on the list respond (1) and some people respond > (2) -- what have you gained and/or lost by this exercise? > > But you are trying to draw into philosophical discussion again. > (I guess that's still better than the "get a f*cking life" > or "cheeky f*cker" replies) > > a personal quirk, no doubt: all discussion is philosophical to me, even > those involving hard bits of free software artifact (both pre- and post- > core dump ;-). > > If I had sounded impatient, I had not resort to verbal > violence as some others did. > > sometimes the sudden move is easy to interpret as both violent and > beautiful, and sometimes funny and sometimes sad. where there is room > for interpretation there is room for misunderstanding (and bugs!). > > thi > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.6068.1052777215.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>]
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) [not found] ` <mailman.6068.1052777215.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> @ 2003-05-13 7:07 ` Kai Großjohann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-13 7:07 UTC (permalink / raw) Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > 0x400908b3 in XtInitializeWidgetClass () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 > (gdb) bt > #0 0x400908b3 in XtInitializeWidgetClass () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 > #1 0x400916a2 in _XtCreateWidget () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 Interesting. It dies deep inside the toolkit. What happens if you compile Emacs without a toolkit? (I'm trying to find out if the toolkit is the problem.) -- This line is not blank. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20030512164103.1607f814.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk>]
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) [not found] ` <20030512164103.1607f814.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk> @ 2003-05-12 16:25 ` Hin-Tak Leung [not found] ` <20030512180149.371bb9d5.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw) That's another pointless reply... you still have not offered any substantial help - e.g. suggestion for compiler switches, small modification at the source level, etc. FWIW, I had tried both "-D_BSD_SOURCE" (the default) and also "-D_GNU_SOURCE -D_BSD_SOURCE" (how the redhat 4.x rpm was built). Both binaries work happily with "-nw" inside an xterm and seg-fault under X. Thanks for another "I am trying to help and I am not saying anything" post... Sam Halliday wrote: > Hin-Tak Leung wrote: > >>>>I am trying to build emacs-19.34 > > <snip> > >>>have you tried using a more recent version of emacs? > > <snip> > >>That's a somewhat time-wasting question > > > don't be a cheeky fucker! i was being nice to you and trying to help, > now don't reply off list... and please keep it to the mailing lists and > newsgroups. > > and don't top post! > > Sam > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20030512180149.371bb9d5.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk>]
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) [not found] ` <20030512180149.371bb9d5.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk> @ 2003-05-12 17:29 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 22:41 ` Sam Halliday 2003-05-14 2:51 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw) (Sigh) A 3rd "See I am so helpful" post. Look - there is no useful content in any of your three replies. Other than my stated reason (an important old elisp script that doesn't run under current versions), I think the memory foot-print and launch-time could well be the reason for anybody wanting to run emacs-19 or even earlier on current systems instead of the current. As you say, it is a frequent-enough request, and I asked a legitimate question that you fail to address anywhere close in 3 posts... Why can't you just try to answer a straight-forward question, as you seem to suggest you "want to help"? As it turned out, if I had mentioned cemacs (and mentioned that I don't want to use MULE), I would be drawing myself into a flame war regarding MULE's merits. That had seemed to be a sensitive subject to some others (ttn@glug.org - who I believe is possibly involved in MULE's development as I seems to have come across that name in other projects). It is a fairly personal choice - cemacs versus MULE, emacs 19 versus 21, and I don't really need to explain why I prefer one to the other. I asked a technical question and reported a possible bug of an old unmaintained version of emacs, which I believe some other people may like to continue to use for their own reasons - those reasons are somewhat irrelevant to the question. I would really prefer it to stay that way. Sam Halliday wrote: > Hin-Tak Leung wrote: > >>Thanks for another "I am trying to help and I am not saying >>anything" post... > > > dude... i was trying to help initially... i know lots of people on > mailing lists who for some reason or other like to run the latest and > greatest linux kernel and gnu c libraries, but yet use whatever old > program they can find (eg your old emacs) so it wasnt exactly a stupid > thing to suggest you upgrade... if you described your system in so much > detail, how come you managed to leave out the bit about cemacs!!! > > i really dont give a shit if you start using xemacs... was that supposed > to be some kind of lame threat, cuz it doesnt exactly scare me :-/ > > get a fuckin life, > Sam > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 17:29 ` Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 22:41 ` Sam Halliday 2003-05-12 22:52 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-14 2:51 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Sam Halliday @ 2003-05-12 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw) Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > (Sigh) A 3rd "See I am so helpful" post. Look - there is no > useful content in any of your three replies. they were not replies to the list... they were personal replies to you! and were not intented for the list, so please remove me from your CC's!!! i offered help, you were a wanker about it... end of story. it had NOTHING to do with the emacs mailing lists at that stage. now please stop spamming me! i apologise to all others on the list for this off topic email, Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 22:41 ` Sam Halliday @ 2003-05-12 22:52 ` Hin-Tak Leung 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-12 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: bug-gnu-emacs Languages... wonder what kind of school gives rise to these people. (You bought shame on the whole *.hw.ac.uk domain...). Sam Halliday wrote: > Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>(Sigh) A 3rd "See I am so helpful" post. Look - there is no >>useful content in any of your three replies. > > > they were not replies to the list... they were personal replies to you! > and were not intented for the list, so please remove me from your > CC's!!! > > i offered help, you were a wanker about it... end of story. it had > NOTHING to do with the emacs mailing lists at that stage. now please > stop spamming me! > > i apologise to all others on the list for this off topic email, > > Sam > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 17:29 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 22:41 ` Sam Halliday @ 2003-05-14 2:51 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2003-05-14 2:51 UTC (permalink / raw) > Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 18:29:50 +0100 > From: Hin-Tak Leung <hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk> > > I asked a technical question and reported a possible bug > of an old unmaintained version of emacs, which I believe > some other people may like to continue to use for their own > reasons - those reasons are somewhat irrelevant to the question. > I would really prefer it to stay that way. Bugs (and a crash is a sign of a bug) should be reported to gnu.emacs.bug, not to gnu.emacs.help. I find it hard to believe you will find someone who will debug this for you in such an old version of Emacs. I looked thru etc/PROBLEMS and found there an entry about crashes at startup when Emacs is built with XFree R6.4; there's a patch there for Xlib, which perhaps will help you (assuming that PROBLEMS describes the same problem there). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-12 14:40 emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 15:22 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen [not found] ` <20030512164103.1607f814.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk> @ 2003-05-14 13:48 ` Richard Stallman 2003-05-14 16:34 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Richard Stallman @ 2003-05-14 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: samuel That's a somewhat time-wasting question - if I am on linux with gcc 3.2 glibc 2.3.x and Xfree 4.3.0 most certainly the linux distribution I use come with a more recent version of emacs or xemacs. If it contains those things, it appears to be a GNU/Linux distribution, not a distribution of Linux alone. See http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html. Now back to my question: why emacs 19.34 segfault when built against glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0? We're not maintaining Emacs 19.34 any more, because it is obsolete. Other people are free to work on it if they want to. In contrast,, we might be interested in trying to fix this problem I want to use a elisp script called cemacs (for Chinese inputs) but unfortunately the inclusion the MULE (Multi-lingual Extension) since version 20 has broken it. if you send a bug report with a precise complete test case. We are certainly interested in improving MULE. Could you write to emacs-devel@gnu.org and tell us why specifically MULE is not as good as cemacs for your usage? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) 2003-05-14 13:48 ` Richard Stallman @ 2003-05-14 16:34 ` Hin-Tak Leung 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-14 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: bug-gnu-emacs Yes, it is a GNU/Linux system. As it turns out, the solution (adding '-z nocombreloc' to LDFLAGS) fixes problem with building current version of emacs as well. It is a problem with 'combreloc' becoming the default since March 2002 in GNU ld so it affects very new GNU/Linux system when trying to build all versions of emacs and xemacs, in addition to very new GNU/Hurd systems, and any other system for which GNU ld is the default linker and for which the version of GNU ld is less than 14 months old. I'll address cemacs/MULE separately. Richard Stallman wrote: > That's a somewhat time-wasting question - if I am on linux with > gcc 3.2 glibc 2.3.x and Xfree 4.3.0 most certainly the linux > distribution I use come with a more recent version of emacs or xemacs. > > If it contains those things, it appears to be a GNU/Linux > distribution, not a distribution of Linux alone. See > http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html. > > Now back to my question: why emacs 19.34 segfault when built against > glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0? > > We're not maintaining Emacs 19.34 any more, because it is obsolete. > Other people are free to work on it if they want to. > > In contrast,, we might be interested in trying to fix this problem > > I want to use a elisp script called cemacs (for Chinese inputs) > but unfortunately the inclusion the MULE (Multi-lingual Extension) > since version 20 has broken it. > > if you send a bug report with a precise complete test case. > > We are certainly interested in improving MULE. Could you write to > emacs-devel@gnu.org and tell us why specifically MULE is not as good > as cemacs for your usage? > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.5658.1052251660.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>]
* Re: emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x, gcc 3.2) [not found] <mailman.5658.1052251660.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> @ 2003-05-07 2:01 ` Sam Halliday 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Sam Halliday @ 2003-05-07 2:01 UTC (permalink / raw) Hin-Tak Leung wrote: > I am trying to build emacs-19.34 against glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0 > on linux with gcc 3.2. The binary works with -nw switch, but > when I run it without -nw, it segfaults with Fatal Error(11). > So it seems to be an X-related problem. have you tried using a more recent version of emacs? emacs-21.3.1 is what i use and it compiled with gcc-3.2.3 on XFree86-4.3 no problems (glibc-3.2.3) using using Lesstif-0.93.41. unless there is some reason you WANT to use an older version? cheers, Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x, gcc 3.2) @ 2003-05-06 20:12 Hin-Tak Leung 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Hin-Tak Leung @ 2003-05-06 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw) I am trying to build emacs-19.34 against glibc-2.3 and Xfree 4.3.0 on linux with gcc 3.2. The binary works with -nw switch, but when I run it without -nw, it segfaults with Fatal Error(11). So it seems to be an X-related problem. I had an older binary which was compiled by gcc 2.95.x against Xfree 4.1(?) and glibc-2.1 (maybe 2.0?) which still works on this current system. #uname -a Linux pc7221 2.4.20 #2 Wed Apr 23 08:44:11 BST 2003 i686 unknown #cat /var/log/XFree86.log XFree86 Version 4.3.0 Release Date: 27 February 2003 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 6.6 Build Operating System: Linux 2.4.20 i686 [ELF] # gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-slackware-linux/3.2.2/specs Configured with: ../gcc-3.2.2/configure --prefix=/usr --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-checking --with-gnu-ld --verbose --target=i386-slackware-linux --host=i386-slackware-linux Thread model: posix gcc version 3.2.2 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-05-14 16:34 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 19+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-05-12 14:40 emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 15:22 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 16:12 ` emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 17:18 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 17:51 ` emacs-19.34 segfaults when built with Xfree 4.3.0(glibc2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 18:15 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 19:00 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 20:36 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen 2003-05-12 22:11 ` Hin-Tak Leung [not found] ` <mailman.6068.1052777215.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> 2003-05-13 7:07 ` Kai Großjohann [not found] ` <20030512164103.1607f814.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk> 2003-05-12 16:25 ` emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x,gcc 3.2) Hin-Tak Leung [not found] ` <20030512180149.371bb9d5.samuel@ma.hw.ac.uk> 2003-05-12 17:29 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-12 22:41 ` Sam Halliday 2003-05-12 22:52 ` Hin-Tak Leung 2003-05-14 2:51 ` Eli Zaretskii 2003-05-14 13:48 ` Richard Stallman 2003-05-14 16:34 ` Hin-Tak Leung [not found] <mailman.5658.1052251660.21513.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> 2003-05-07 2:01 ` emacs-19.34 segfauls when built with Xfree 4.3.0 (glibc 2.3.x, gcc 3.2) Sam Halliday -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2003-05-06 20:12 Hin-Tak Leung
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).