On Feb 5, 2008 9:28 AM, Drake Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I now have Chicken with DEBUGBUILD=1 running in a GDB trying to > compile gl.scm with the same command line chicken-setup's csc > invocation said it was using before. It bombs with SEGV. I could > show the whole backtrace, but given the way Chicken uses C calls I'm > not sure it'd be helpful... is there something specific I should be > doing in this case? I see a couple of references on chicken-hackers, > but nothing that I can decipher; I also see a reference to gdb.egg > < http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg04747.html >, > but that appears to be for some other purpose. > > The top stackframe shows: > > #0 0x0000000000482398 in f_10980 (c=2, t0=140735375900672, t1=6) at > compiler.c:5429 > 5429 if(C_truep((C_word)C_lambdainfop(((C_word*)t0)[5]))){ > > There's about five hundred other opaque-looking stackframes, and then > > #502 0x00002b8728bb323a in tr2 (k=0x2b8728c4b5a6 <f_4232>) at library.c:6067 > #503 0x00002b8728ecde35 in CHICKEN_run (toplevel=0x0) at runtime.c:1345 > #504 0x00002b8728ecbac3 in CHICKEN_main (argc=17, argv=0x7fff821765b8, > toplevel=0x404539) at runtime.c:564 > #505 0x00000000004044fe in main (argc=17, argv=0x7fff821765b8) at > chicken.c:1929 > > which I don't expect to be that helpful. > > GDB appears to be refusing to load the header files containing any of > these macros (for reasons which I do not know---it found the > compiler.c source file just fine), meaning that trying to evaluate the > pieces of that statement to pick it apart would be an exercise in pain > at the moment. Should I try to get GDB to behave on that front, or is > that barking up the wrong tree? >
Sorry for the late reply. I'm currently at a loss trying to figure out what's wrong here. I will try this on out 64-bit machine when I find some time. cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
