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
Message-ID: <001501c057c5$ea36fd20$9865fea9@intel9txl52pzr>
From: "Tim Prince" <tprince AT computer DOT org>
To: <cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
Subject: g++/binutils fragility
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 08:28:29 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400

Sorry to be posting a problem without suggesting a solution.  I have a piece of C++ code which I have received from one of my
co-workers.  Making a few changes to make it acceptable to g++, without changing its behavior on the original compilers, I find that
it produces a SIGSEGV  under the stock cygwin installation (repeatedly so, over a number of setup.exe refreshes).  I grabbed the
binutils-20001029-2 source and built and installed it; the problem went away.  I set the alignment parameter in bfd/coff-i386.c to
(3) (64-bit alignments) and it re-appeared. The thing runs reliably in RH linux with gcc-2.95.2, but not with the commercial alpha
test compiler which I have.

I have been building binutils with CFLAGS='-Os -march=pentiumpro -pipe';  I've wondered whether there are any alignment problems
which would require more than one package to be built with identical compiler version and options and bfd alignment settings.

When I run under gdb, I am unsuccessful in attempting to step into the functions where the fault occurs; the cursor winds up on the
final "}" of one function or another.  This did not change with the latest experimental gdb.

I apologize for these struggles of an old Fortran programmer, but I have eliminated the warnings and complaints produced by the
various compilers, and still I have this effect: in summary,

 installing binutils from cygwin source produces reliable operation; installing the cygwin binary does not.

OS:  W2KSP1
IBM T20 256MB RAM



--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com