X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Envelope-From: paubert AT iram DOT es Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 08:24:29 +0200 From: Gabriel Paubert To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Banging my head against the guile-for-windows wall Message-ID: <20140924062429.GB21949@visitor2.iram.es> References: <20140923045453 DOT 56dc3de2 AT akka> <20140923052427 DOT 21624 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spamina-Bogosity: Unsure X-Spamina-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Spamina-Spam-Report: Content analysis details: (-0.2 points) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5002] Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 01:21:13AM +0200, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: > Peter Stuge wrote: > > >> In addition I added "-disable-Werror". The original "-Werror" flag > >> made the build process exit at the config stage. It complained > >> about the type "long long", which allegedly is not supported in > >> c90. > > > > Mh, don't do this. Fix up the guile source code locally instead. > > > > > >> With this flag warnings are ignored and the build declares success. > > Configure actually checked for long long and determined it to be > supported on my set-up. So I figured, this particular warning can be > safely ignored. > > > But who knows what the code will do? There may be actual programming > > errors in the source which the compiler identifies as warnings... > > > > > >> However, I get immediate segfault if I start the resulting > >> guile.exe with wine32. > > > > My guess is that the code is broken somehow. > > And it somehow just affects the cross compile. The very same source > works just fine if built native on Linux. > > > > I would work with the source code instead. First fix all warnings > > found by the compiler. Maybe also enable additional warnings and fix > > those. If the shell still crashes, debug by sprinkling > > printf("messages"); fflush(stdout); > > all over the code, to find where the crash happens. If you have a debugger, the first thing I do is to run the debugger to know where the crash happens by getting a stack backtrace at the point the crash happens. Gabriel