Ken Hornstein <[email protected]> writes:
>>With inc, I got a core dump without and with the -snoop. The output,
>>with the -snoop. is below. I don't think I should send the 2.4 megabyte
>>core dump to the whole group, but if you want me to, I will send it to
>>you.
>
>Sigh. This is the nmh you compiled yourself, right?
Yes, I did.
>In theory that
>shouldn't have mattered. I don't think the core file will help very much
>because without the exact system and executable you are using I probably
>wouldn't be able to make use of it.
>
>Anyway ... if you didn't compile everything with -g, could you add -g
>to CFLAGS and LDFLAGS, and then run the same inc command under gdb?
>If you did compile with -g already, running "gdb `which inc' core" and
>then getting a backtrace (using the "bt" command) would be helpful.
>Actaully, that might be useful to get a function name even without further
>debugging symbols.
I'm not certain what you want me to do next. I have never run a program under
gdb and I don't know whether at this point in my senility I could. Maybe all
you need is my copy of inc and the core dump??
I compiled nmh with the defaults. That is, I just did a make.
file /usr/local/nmh/bin/inc yields:
/usr/local/nmh/bin/inc: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV),
/dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.18, not stripped
At this point, I'm getting scared. My present Internet provider will soon cut
me off. I will then be without Email, even to get assistance from you or
anybody else.
Norman Shapiro
