On Monday 09 March 2009, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Ville Skyttä writes:
> This isn't the exact one but the only practical difference should
> be that the one the OP is using was compiled with gcc 4.4.
I'm sorry, but it needs to be *exact*. For example, that "only
practical difference" is a real big one. GCC bugs/features are very
often the underlying cause of this kind of thing (ie, crashes that
occur only on one person's system), so that *really* matters. Also
what X was compiled with, etc.
Here's why I think it doesn't really matter in this case, and there are a lot
of other similar ones as well although this one (Fedora development) is about
as bleeding edge/extreme as it gets:
There's no way a simple gcc version string can exactly describe the compiler
used. For example the Fedora development gcc 4.4 is an upstream
not-even-pre-release-I-think snapshot and has tens of patches applied on top
of it (Fedora gcc maintainer is also a gcc upstream dev, duh).
Ditto X: http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/xorg-x11-server/
Nobody here is going to even try to install the exact same environment the OP
has. Even people who for some reason run Fedora development (I don't, and
unless Jerry does, I bet nobody else here does) would only try with their
environment du jour. Someone on entirely different distro/OS might have a
different gcc 4.4 snapshot available and could be interested enough to try
out with it, ditto X, and report whether they can reproduce or not. Or
someone might have a clue what's up just by looking at the stack trace or
could remember seeing a similar crash sometime in an entirely different
environment, or remember/know/have a clue that the
bug/misconfiguration/$something is not in XEmacs but somewhere else and of
the kind that it makes no sense to even try working around it in XEmacs. I
don't expect anything more.
And FWIW, this isn't something that occurs only on one person's system.
There's at least two of them, and given what I guess is the popularity of
XEmacs in Fedora at the moment, I think with two active bug reporters who run
into the exact same issue at the same time, it can be fairly safely assumed
that it crashes for everyone running Fedora development currently. (Well,
not any more, I disabled XFontSet support in the latest build, currently only
string to fontset conversion warnings remain.)
> I'm afraid that'd be more or less "start
Well, if that's what it is, please say so,
I thought that was obvious from the original bug report.
including the options if
any used to start XEmacs (and if it doesn't match "^xemacs -vanilla$
they need to go back and try that to confirm it's not affected by
something in their personal environment, etc).
This one I missed, and have asked now.
If the user wants to ship me his environment, machine and all, maybe
something can be done,
Come on, this is just silly.
but without a way to reproduce locally, I can't do anything
Nobody is demanding you (or anyone for that matter) to do anything. I just
forwarded a bug report. You could just have left it at your previous reply
(and can still leave it at this) and maybe someone else would have looked
into it, maybe not. Starting ranting about gcc and/or X instability or (even
jokingly) asking physical machines to be shipped around just diverts people's
attention elsewhere. At least it does that for me (not that it matters much
in my case, I'm not qualified to really do much more than forward bug reports
and act as a patch monkey in these parts of XEmacs anyway).
XEmacs-Beta mailing list