Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Wed, 21 Feb 2001 21:23:29 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	"''cygwin AT cygwin DOT com' '" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc:	kcamera AT bwrc DOT eecs DOT berkeley DOT edu
Subject:	Re: GCC untrackable crashes
Message-ID:	<20010221212329.E7576@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	"''cygwin AT cygwin DOT com' '" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>,
	kcamera AT bwrc DOT eecs DOT berkeley DOT edu
References:	<711F6B80B5B4D211BA900090272AB7649C4210 AT noyce DOT eecs DOT berkeley DOT edu> <20010221205955 DOT A7576 AT redhat DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<20010221205955.A7576@redhat.com>; from cgf@redhat.com on Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 08:59:55PM -0500

On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 08:59:55PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 05:23:53PM -0800, Kevin Camera wrote:
>>Mumit and others,
>>
>>Well, it was true that my character arrays were short by one character
>>in the first case, and in the second case calling ofstream.clear()
>>before reusing the stream got rid of all the seg faults.  The program
>>is fine now.
>>
>>With hindsight, I was completely confused and thrown off by the strange
>>behavior I saw in GDB (meaning the lack of a stack trace or any other
>>information about the seg fault).  Luckily (for a hardware guy who
>>known little about real programming) I managed to hand-step through the
>>code and find the problematic lines...  Would any of the GCC developers
>>like my complete source example to add some functionality to the
>>compiler or debugger to better catch/aviod these errors?
>
>It didn't occur to me before, but you were probably in the wrong thread
>when you attempted to get a stack trace since the cygwin DLL is
>multithreaded by default.  Typing "thread 1" would probably have
>provided more instructive output.

...actually, I meant that typing "thread 1" prior to trying to get a
backtrace would have provided more instructive output.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -