From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: guile-2.0.0 fails to build without threads Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:26:05 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4D9DCE98.5080808@gentoo.org> <87y63gj765.fsf@rapitore.luna> <87aafusesz.fsf@rapitore.luna> <874o62s7hu.fsf@rapitore.luna> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1302697558 14060 80.91.229.12 (13 Apr 2011 12:25:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:25:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org To: Marco Maggi Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 13 14:25:53 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9z8p-0005Sf-Lt for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:25:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56760 helo=lists2.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9z8p-0005EE-54 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:25:51 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51986) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9z8i-0005DE-Qu for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:25:48 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9z8d-00023J-2T for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:25:44 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:42218 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9z8c-000232-TP for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:25:39 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61EE64288; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:27:36 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=SACRf6QoX8wFv8NPi8yQn5eepA4=; b=Muw9yV fwKd+kO1EWbJGQ9Ncx5f1CCSJXrAbQd6xAxeKwenIhQ9XdjD6xU/zaYAU+Gz8Edh WfhTfFPVJt4WbWXp0+6uBTzIF2wEoDMbzcIwZbeyXumOLlJpRr3ltl8PIyLj7QM+ /vNYBsA2STvj6ZVEbY9Z9NUsaXe4B/hw4LNis= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=mEn5/bGZ24C7PKGdf93t3ZizggPWMZLq 0K8Raml+pJwMiDQ9civFaTLHQxUQjumjuHUNx2dG2qm2tbOJ8jqndYVYq/DxyzHS qp6Rg//6SOQGQB8tGxQv/ZzU6y2D0oTpyU1nvOsYSX3MGF8IOWBi48Nv15SbXcmf UNe35HH4X+E= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6D34287; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:27:34 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B24544286; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:27:32 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <874o62s7hu.fsf@rapitore.luna> (Marco Maggi's message of "Wed, 13 Apr 2011 13:42:05 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 68D07996-65C9-11E0-A56E-E8AB60295C12-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:5468 Archived-At: On Wed 13 Apr 2011 13:42, Marco Maggi writes: > Marco Maggi wrote: >> I still get the Stack overflow problem though with the >> stable-2.0 branch. >> >> Snapshot guile-2.0.0.179-c89b.tar.gz builds successfully >> if I use the "--without-threads" option, but fails in the >> same way when I do not use the option. > > It looks like it is the darn CFLAGS variable: if I set it > on the command line of "configure" I get the overflow error, > if I leave it alone everything goes. It should be user > configurable, as a de facto standard. Interesting. It seems that -O3 is consuming more C stack space than with the default -O2. What does your `ulimit -a' print out? Usually we set a stack limit according to some percentage of the rlimits. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/