[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault
From: |
Hideki IWAMOTO |
Subject: |
Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Jun 2003 19:21:19 +0900 |
On Sun, 15 Jun 2003 15:49:58 +0900, Hideki IWAMOTO wrote...
>
> > Does gtags always abort at the same point?
>
> Yes.
When DEBUG was defined, the place which gtags aborts changed.
CFLAGS='-g -Wall -O2'
(gdb) bt
#0 0x08079493 in memmove ()
#1 0x08053e67 in bt_psplit (t=0x80cf738, h=0x9a5408c, l=0xa13fc30,
r=0xa13ec2c, pskip=0xbfff8fd6, ilen=36) at bt_split.c:694
#2 0x080539ec in bt_page (t=0x80cf738, h=0x9a5408c, lp=0xbfff8fcc,
rp=0xbfff8fd0, skip=0xbfff8fd6, ilen=169097296) at bt_split.c:428
#3 0x080531ed in __bt_split (t=0x80cf738, sp=0x9a5408c, key=0xbfff90a0,
data=0xa13ec2c, flags=0, ilen=3955479520, argskip=169097296) at
bt_split.c:115
#4 0x0805243a in __bt_put (dbp=0xa143850, key=0xbfff90a0, data=0xbfff9098,
flags=0) at bt_put.c:214
#5 0x0804c1c9 in dbop_put (dbop=0xa143850, name=0x80d16c1 "card_ids",
data=0x87819f8 "card_ids 6819 330", fid=0x80d38c4 "6819") at dbop.c:229
#6 0x0804e937 in gtags_put (gtop=0x80d0498, tag=0x80cfbb0 "command",
record=0x825b750 "command", fid=0xa131795 "6819") at gtagsop.c:407
#7 0x0804ee4e in gtags_add (gtop=0x80d0498, comline=0x825b750 "command",
path=0x80cfbb0 "command", flags=65536) at gtagsop.c:531
#8 0x0804a76e in createtags (dbpath=0x0, root=0x10000 <Address 0x10000 out of
bounds>, db=2) at gtags.c:1084
#9 0x08048d88 in main (argc=1, argv=0xbfffe4f0) at gtags.c:717
#10 0x0805c90b in __libc_start_main ()
CFLAGS='-g -Wall -O2 -DDEBUG'
(gdb) bt
#0 __bt_split (t=0x80d4898, sp=0x9a500cc, key=0xbfff8fa0, data=0xbfff8f98,
flags=0, ilen=135088332, argskip=161911275) at bt_split.c:196
#1 0x0805272a in __bt_put (dbp=0x9a691eb, key=0xbfff8fa0, data=0xbfff8f98,
flags=0) at bt_put.c:214
#2 0x0804c1c9 in dbop_put (dbop=0x9a691eb, name=0x80d6821 "card",
data=0x8786b58 "card 5978
345,353,490,492,493,498,500,501,506,508,509,514,555,557,561,568,572,577,598,607,618,645,654,661,665,680,682,723,725,771,773,775,812,812,815,817,8
19,820,820,822,822,823,823,828,828,831,833,84"..., fid=0x80d8a24 "5978") at
dbop.c:229
#3 0x0804ea77 in gtags_put (gtop=0x80d55f8, tag=0x80d4d10 "chan",
record=0x8459ed8 "chan", fid=0x9a26b86 "5978") at gtagsop.c:407
#4 0x0804ef97 in gtags_add (gtop=0x80d55f8, comline=0x8459ed8 "chan",
path=0x80d4d10 "chan", flags=0) at gtagsop.c:531
#5 0x0804a76e in createtags (dbpath=0x0, root=0x0, db=2) at gtags.c:1084
#6 0x08048d88 in main (argc=1, argv=0xbfffe3ec) at gtags.c:717
#7 0x0805fa1b in __libc_start_main ()
----
Hideki IWAMOTO address@hidden
- [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault, Hideki IWAMOTO, 2003/06/14
- Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault, Hideki IWAMOTO, 2003/06/14
- Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault, Hideki IWAMOTO, 2003/06/16
- Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault, Hideki IWAMOTO, 2003/06/18
- Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault, Shigio Yamaguchi, 2003/06/18
- Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault, Hideki IWAMOTO, 2003/06/19
- Re: [BUG REPORT] gtags segmentation fault, Shigio Yamaguchi, 2003/06/20