From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30568 invoked by alias); 14 Jul 2002 10:06:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30545 invoked by uid 71); 14 Jul 2002 10:06:03 -0000 Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 03:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020714100603.30543.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: ada/7208: build of gnatlib failed with SIGILL Reply-To: Florian Weimer X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00437.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR ada/7208; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Florian Weimer To: Adrian Knoth Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: ada/7208: build of gnatlib failed with SIGILL Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 12:00:05 +0200 Adrian Knoth writes: >> > Yes. I've tried it with the actual cvs co, here is the result, though >> > SIGILL changed to segfault: >> We need a GDB backtrace of the gnat1 process when it receives SIGILL, >> and a disassembly of the function corresponding to the topmost frame. > > Is it ok for you if I'll send you a statically linked version of my xgcc > and the corefile? The core file does not help much, unless it has been generated by SIGILL. > (to your personal address? I guess the gcc-list doesn't want it) I can try it on my i586-pc-linux-gnu machine (maybe GCC really generates an instruction invalid on i586), but I'd rather like to see the backtrace on your machine. > I've now deleted everything, cvs co will follow and the static > built, too. I guess building without threads is easier for you to > debug, isn't it? It shouldn't matter; the compiler itself does not use the multi-tasking run-time library.