From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#41321: 27.0.91; Emacs aborts due to invalid pseudovector objects Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 05:30:37 +0300 Message-ID: <83k110wxte.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zha8cgpi.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1vibmyj.fsf@gnu.org> <83imgublku.fsf@gnu.org> <831rncjuwf.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7w5xvfa.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2phwb9x.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1v9w9vi.fsf@gnu.org> <83mu5xw50d.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="54981"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 41321@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 25 04:31:11 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2tS-000EFl-PU for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 25 May 2020 04:31:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53148 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2tR-0001Hk-MG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:31:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41640) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2tK-0001Ga-Dg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:31:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:55932) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2tK-0003Cs-3E for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:31:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2tJ-0000Io-Vz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:31:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 02:31:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41321 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 41321-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41321.15903738361132 (code B ref 41321); Mon, 25 May 2020 02:31:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 41321) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 May 2020 02:30:36 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39245 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2su-0000IB-Ga for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:30:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:34174) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2st-0000Hz-2U for 41321@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:30:35 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41338) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2sn-0002w8-EL; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:30:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1382 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jd2sl-0003i5-2k; Sun, 24 May 2020 22:30:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Pip Cet on Sun, 24 May 2020 19:40:09 +0000) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:180944 Archived-At: > From: Pip Cet > Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 19:40:09 +0000 > Cc: 41321@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier > > > I use GDB every day in this very "unusual > > environment", both when debugging Emacs and other programs. > > And you've never run into GDB bugs? Not such blatant ones, no, and not lately. > Are you saying the bug I've found isn't "a real trouble"? I'm saying I'm not convinced that problem has anything to do with this particular segfault. > What they show you is that memory at a certain address, which they > helpfully specify, isn't mapped. > > You conclude that memory at a totally different address isn't mapped, > even though GDB quite explicitly never says so. > > That conclusion is invalid. Your opinion, not mine, not yet anyway.