[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: clisp build failure



On Friday 26 Mar 2004 18:02, you wrote:

> Isn't the definition of build-dep such that you shouldn't be able to
> build without one of the listed packages? What packages were different
> or missing?

libsigsegv-dev. clisp builds without it, but stack overflow detection is 
disabled.

> *** - handle_fault error2 ! address = 0x4023fc60 not in
> [0x19bbc000,0x19be75f8) !
> SIGSEGV cannot be cured. Fault address = 0x4023fc60.
> make[1]: *** [interpreted.mem] Segmentation fault
> make[1]: Leaving directory
> `/home/carlos/src/clisp/clisp-2.33/debian/build'
> make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2

Hmm. I don't get this on paer. I have built a couple of packages on there by 
hacking the control file and building libsigsegv by hand, but I would like to 
be sure they can be reproducibly built.

Some slightly newer packages are isntalled on paer:

+++-==============-==============-============================================
ii  gcc            3.3.3-2        The GNU C compiler
ii  binutils       2.14.90.0.7-5  The GNU assembler, linker and binary utiliti
ii  libc6          2.3.2.ds1-11   GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone
ii  debhelper      4.2.4          helper programs for debian/rules
ii  gettext        0.14.1-2       GNU Internationalization utilities
ii  bison          1.875a-1       A parser generator that is compatible with Y
ii  libncurses5-de 5.4-2          Developer's libraries and docs for ncurses
ii  groff          1.18.1-15      GNU troff text-formatting system
ii  xlibs-dev      4.3.0-5        X Window System client library development f
ii  libreadline4-d 4.3-10         GNU readline and history libraries, developm

The libsigsegv-dev I used was a newly built one from the libsigsegv 2.1 
source. If you have the time I would be interested to see if you get the same 
result with a fresh rebuild of the libsigsegv-dev package?

Perhaps the newer gcc may make some difference, but I would be surprised if it 
did.



Reply to: