Re: [Tiny-cobol-users] Segmentation Fault

[Reg <re...@ri...>]

David Essex-2 wrote:
> 
> Reg wrote:
> 
>  > ...
>  >> Thanks for rapid response.
>  >> Doesn't seem to matter which source code, so
>  >> looks like compiler bug.
>  >> Will debug it when I get chance, probably
>  >> about 3 or 4 weeks.
>  >> Meanwhile, I seem to recall someone muttering
>  >> about gcc 3 returning a yes/ok instead of a 0/1
>  >> or vice versa on a memory alloc, so might try
>  >> running on an older machine.
> 
> The latest release (and CVS) was developed using GCC3x.
> 
> AFAIK, TC was never tested on any GCC4. And there were some problems
> reported. I don't recall the specifics.
> 
> If you are feeling REALLY adventurous, you could try the current 'new
> and improved' CVS version.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> PS.
> How to download CVS version using anonymous CVS:
> cvsopts='-da...@ti...:/cvsroot/tiny-cobol'
> cvs $cvsopts login
> Password: <enter>
> cvs -z3 $cvsopts co -P development
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Tin...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tiny-cobol-users
> 
> 
Thanks David, will follow up..... eventually.
Currently sinking under workload, but still keen on sorting this.
Any idea when CVS moving to stable?
Regards,
Reg.
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Segmentation-Fault-tf4383688.html#a12530034
Sent from the tiny-cobol-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.