From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Eli Zaretskii" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.windows,gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: Re: Current word on binaries Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 14:06:09 +0200 Sender: help-emacs-windows-bounces+gnu-help-emacs-windows=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <7494-Sat14Feb2004140608+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> References: <009901c3ec70$b3013940$6400a8c0@austin.rr.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1076760697 10579 80.91.224.253 (14 Feb 2004 12:11:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:11:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-emacs-windows@gnu.org, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-emacs-windows-bounces+gnu-help-emacs-windows=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 14 13:11:30 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Arydt-0006HZ-00 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 13:11:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Arydr-0007Lj-K9 for gnu-help-emacs-windows@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 07:11:27 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AryZf-0007Jq-1t for help-emacs-windows@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 07:07:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AryZ8-0007Bu-Rb for help-emacs-windows@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 07:07:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.23] (helo=aragorn.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AryYK-0006ET-Kh; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 07:05:44 -0500 Original-Received: from zaretski (pns03-205-122.inter.net.il [80.230.205.122]) by aragorn.inter.net.il (MOS 3.4.4-GR) with ESMTP id CMC30916; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 14:05:36 +0200 (IST) Original-To: Harald Maier X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 In-reply-to: (message from Harald Maier on Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:33:50 +0100) X-BeenThere: help-emacs-windows@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion forum for users of the GNU Emacs port to Windows List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-emacs-windows-bounces+gnu-help-emacs-windows=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.windows:2012 gmane.emacs.bugs:6960 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs:6960 > From: Harald Maier > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:33:50 +0100 > > > > I tried it too and I found too that something goes wrong. 'emacs -q' > > works fine, but when I tried to load my .emacs it displays the 'Emacs > > Abort Dialog' and complains that 'A fatal error has occured!' > > I did some additional tests and it looks that the problem occurs only > if emacs-21.3 is compiled with a latest cygwin gcc. I did two test > with the emacs-21.3.tar.gz from March last year and the actual tarball > from ftp.gnu.org. On both sources the same happens, so it does not > look that something has changed since the compromise of the server. > Afterwards I compiled emacs with MSVC and the result is that all works > as expected. Currently I have no clue why the problem with gcc > happens. What version of GCC is the one that produces a bad binary? What does "gcc --version" says? Can someone run Emacs under GDB and see where exactly does it abort? One possible idea to check is to use lower level of optimizations when building Emacs, like -O0 or -O1. Can someone see if that produces a good binary?