From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Bruce Korb" Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: how does one debug a SEGV in scm_threads_prehistory? Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:25:57 -0700 Message-ID: <668c430c0806181325h68619345n84a0454e7715d587@mail.gmail.com> References: <668c430c0806180937g7fd824e8m7a871340d480599a@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1213820799 8078 80.91.229.12 (18 Jun 2008 20:26:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: "Greg Troxel" Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 18 22:27:23 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K94FH-0001Dp-6c for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:27:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52890 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K94ES-0006Yc-HJ for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:26:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K94ED-0006Qw-FW for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:26:01 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K94EB-0006On-F6 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:26:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54097 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K94EB-0006Oe-Bx for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:25:59 -0400 Original-Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.248]:25198) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K94EA-0006XT-SF for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:25:59 -0400 Original-Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id k29so6844999rvb.6 for ; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:25:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=TqIEjw07/YurrZFG4vOAkEdhuX0uEMjXYB2GQ7/XDAc=; b=ccNgSZ8pq6YfoskdmQQ+OotvYGjF6iegVPLs1qbbPLZTSOIlwavyo1L+m33NNg0oo0 dLfL+0RR4wRYOBst6gnv/X35NVJt3VvEUbaw5Yx7N2dnzlTeydpnw2r3lvh9PchpYWX4 oz5aDOnF5zAa+HROqN+3o1UqhhzZWe/lMWnfM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=gXsAlqtEsA7NVcdAZo3OmmrfivBgthXCjgv9iAJBRlYo2sdHeOPjCBG2ymUuVJ8lVQ s5n2Cws8voBdv1pCOJ1f056Qp5B+Jvd6Wi3il8yB3I/fUB18Lkx2yThLtGAOqCuVTa0p wT9qdd9Tv44khAqS6FJZ0Uuf31u0YtVIhNDfY= Original-Received: by 10.141.79.12 with SMTP id g12mr5879272rvl.29.1213820757510; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.141.194.14 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:25:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: d7d6440433b101b3 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:7332 Archived-At: On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > Our main development server was "upgraded" to 64 bits, but mostly > still runs 32 bit software, > so this is from a 32 bit build on a 64 bit platform. Naturally, this > all works on 32 on 32 and > on 64 on 64. But with 32 on 64, not so well: > > I presume you are talking about Linux and going from i386 to > amd64/x86_64 (not sure which name is used in Linux). I would be It depends on which Linux: SuSE is x86_64 and Debian amd64. Unclear why the first name needed to be rethought. Whatever. > suspicious that the i386 binary is getting linked with some amd64 libs ldd showed which libguile, and it was the 32 bit flavor. (I did go there, too. It's just hard to recount all the rabbit trails I've gone down....) > somehow - to first order it would seem to be an OS bug if the emulated > i386 binary doesn't run the same as on i386. But I could certainly see > an allowable difference leading to triggering a latent bug in guile. > > Can you trigger this with a simple example? I have i386 and now amd64 > boxes, and would be curious to try the NetBSD i386 binary on amd64, as > well as native. "simple example" is always a stumbling block. Especially when it is happening in libguile (which is not simple) and triggered by my app (which is as large as Guile is). I'll see what I can do. Probably next week or so. Thanks - Bruce