Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Dave Korn" <dave DOT korn AT artimi DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: Mysterious random crashes with latest snapshots
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:45:52 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <20050630145818.GB23000@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Message-ID: <SERRANO1O0aAGgWtpe1000002f1@SERRANO.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 30 June 2005 15:58

> On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 03:37:25PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>  I think I remember noticing that backtracing across sigfe doesn't always
>> work too well.  Then again, there could be a problem with the debug info:
> 
> "doesn't always" == "never".
>
>>> #3  0x00435d27 in fhandler_pipe::get_guard ()
>> 
>> makes no sense.  But I would imagine the peculiarity is down to sigfe;
>> it does something unexpected to the stack frame, that the debug info
>> doesn't reflect.
> 
> No, it's due to the fact that 0x00435d27 is an address in the
> application and the application has no debugging symbols.

  That doesn't explain how it managed to think that 0x0040xxxx was somewhere
in the middle of the dll.  I wouldn't have been surprised if the dll was
loaded *lower* in memory than the executable and that was the last symbol at
the highest address in the dll, but I am surprised that it could get
confused by symbols that point to much higher addresses.

>>> In case you haven't noticed, I'm running a snapshot, which, IIUC, *is*
>>> a debug build.  And that doesn't help much, as you can see.
>> 
>> Debug yes; unoptimised, I think not, although we'd need cgf or cv to
>> confirm how the snapshot process works.
> 
> The snapshots are unstripped.  Otherwise, it is a normal build.

  Right, so -O2 then, cheers for clearing that up.

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/