🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4hh186$jgv@segfault.monkeys.com>,
Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg@monkeys.com> wrote:
<In article <4h8gcn$630@falcon.ccs.uwo.ca>,
<David Linder <dwl@pineapple.apmaths.uwo.ca> wrote:
<>Dean Schulze (schulze@lpl.arizona.edu) wrote:
<>:     Yes.  When gcc aborts a compile with "Internal compiler error"
<>: I'm sure that it is gcc's fault.  And there is no mention of signal 11
<>: in the Linux FAQ.
<>
<>People post about signal 11 error messages quite often, and the stock
<>reply is to check for bad memory, bad motherboard, etc.
<
<Your youth and inexperience is showing.
<
<You obviously were not around in the days before GCC 2.1. (Back in the
<days of gcc 1.x.x, signal 11 almost always meant that you had found
<yet another compiler bug, and that is _still_ true today.)
<
<If you get a signal 11 from _any_ of the GNU tools, assume that it is
<due to a software bug unless you have concrete evidence to the contrary.
<
<Hardware these days is VASTLY more reliable that software.

I'm in the middle of a real cool bug.  The program runs fine compiled
with gcc 2.7.2 under SunOS, runs fine under gdb on Linux, but seg faults
when run directly from the shell on Linux.  Same code and compiler, just
different environments.

Time to dig some more...

Eric