Nope, you are not alone, I see the same, CVS cygwin on XP
Very similar back trace
John A. Turner wrote:
[cc'ing xemacs-beta, even though I'm no longer on that
list...]
in
http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-nt/200208/msg00083.html I wrote:
>wanted to mention that I'm still experiencing crashes when updating
>packages - looks similar to what I reported here:
>
>
http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-nt/200206/msg00015.html
>
>but slightly different
>
>attached are:
>
>o my Installation file, with config details
>o the lisp backtrace, and
>o the C stacktrace
>
>for the following sequence of actions:
>
>o gdb --nw --args ./xemacs -vanilla
>o at gdb prompt, run
>o once xemacs is started:
> 1. load-library efs
> 2. set efs-generate-anonymous-password
> 3. Tools -> Packages -> Add download site ->
xemacs.org
> 4. Tools -> Packages -> List and Install
> 5. select a pkg for which a newer version exists (in this
> case dired) and hit return
> 6. hit x to install
>
>kaboom
I take it no one else is seeing this? is anyone building recent CVS
versions with the same setup I'm using able to successfully download/
install pkgs as shown above? if not, what configs *are* able to do
the above successfully?
again, here's a bit of my Installation file:
>uname -a: CYGWIN_NT-5.0 VALIS2 1.3.12(0.54/3/2) 2002-07-06 02:16 i686 unknown
>
>./configure '--extra-verbose' '--pdump' '--compiler=gcc'
'--with-x11=no'
'--with-gtk=no' '--debug' '--error-checking=all'
'--cflags=-g'
>XEmacs 21.5-b8 "broccoli" configured for `i686-pc-cygwin'.
>
>Compilation / Installation:
> Source code location: /usr/local/src/xemacs
> Installation prefix: /usr/local
> Operating system description file: `s/cygwin32.h'
> Machine description file: `m/intel386.h'
> Compiler: gcc
-I/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-cygwin/3.2/../../../../include/noX
-I/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-cygwin/3.2/../../../../include/noX -g
> Relocating allocator for buffers: no
> GNU version of malloc: yes
unfortunately, as noted above I'm no longer on xemacs-beta - but just took a
look at the archives and noticed this thread:
http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-beta/200208/msg00458.html
maybe that's the same issue?
thanks,
-John Turner