I had the same problem using gcc (2.95) it seemed to fix the problem once I
upgraded to 2.96 and recompiled. Unfortunately it never complained when I
originally compiled it with the older version.

Also, the 2.95 version was from a mandrake rpm versus the 2.96 version which
was redhat rpm...

--Brett

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kir Kolyshkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "rob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:59 AM
Subject: [aseek-users] Re: UdmSearch: Webboard: 2 words in search s.cgi
causes an error


> rob wrote:
> > I successfully indexed 30,000 websites. with aspseek 1.0
> >
> > When i search with one word, everything works perfect.
> >
> > When i search with 2 or more words seperarted by space, an error
> > occurs and typically searchd -D  is gone/dies
>
> First, please don't ask ASPSeek-related questions at MnogoSearch webboard.
> ASPSeek and MnogoSearch are completely unrelated and even competing
projects.
>
> Second, I suspect that your compiler is weird. Please try to recompile
searchd
> without -O2 flag. To do that, run
>
> CXXFLAGS="-g -O0" ./configure --your-options
> make clean
> cd src
> make searchd
>
> then manually install searchd to /usr/local/aspseek/sbin/ (or there you
have it)
> and restart (killall -TERM searchd; sleep 5; ./searchd -D)
>
> Try your search again. If it is ok and searchd is stable now, blame your
compiler,
> or, better, upgrade it. It it is not, please take sure that your running
searchd
> is really compiled without -O2, and then blame us. No! Don't blame, just
send a
> bug report to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and tell all the details.
>
> BTW to subscribe to aseek-users, please send "subsribe aseek-users" in the
> body of the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] This list is a
definitive
> place for ASPSeek users' problems.
>
> -- |< [] [] |_    [EMAIL PROTECTED]    http://kir.sever.net   ICQ 7551596 --
> "Ok, the guy who made the netfilter Makefile was probably on some
interesting
>  and probably illegal drugs when we wrote it."  -- Linus Torvalds.
>



Reply via email to