Quoting Tino Keitel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I suggest compiling XFree86 with the optimization flags, but also with -g, and run it under the custom gdb at ftp://ftp.xfree86.org/pub/xpert/gdb Do it from a remote computer.
It is dependant on your compiler version, snapshots may have bugs. But most times I found this sort of problem and could figure out what was wrong (sometimes I just find the chunk of code that is breaking and rewrite it...), it was some program error, like writting past the start/end of a stack buffer, uninitialized data that happens to have the same contents after some time (anything that was left in the heap after malloc/free calls), etc. > > Seem strange to me that a software like XFree86 cannot use > optimization > > FLAGS durring compile time. Here is what I used as optimization --> > "-O2 > > -march=i686 -funroll-loops" and XFree86 fail. Again without the > previous > > optimization FLAGS, all run ok. > > > > For me, this mean that XFree86 cannot be compiled to get advantage of > i686 > > CPU architecture :(( > > I would think about this in a different way. In my point of view, this > is a code generation bug in the compiler (gcc?). In a perfect world, > any piece of source code should compile and work perfectly even with > the most exotic optimization flags turned on. > > I also had this problem with other software. Most of the time I could > determine _one_ source file that will be broken with _one_ certain > optimization option. I would at first try to build without the > -funroll-loops option. > > Regards, > Tino > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > dipl.-inf. Innominate Security Technologies AG > software engineer networking people > tel: +49.30.6392-3308 http://www.innominate.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Xpert mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert Paulo _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
