🚀 go-pugleaf

Dean Schulze wrote:
> =

>     Ferdinand de Boevere writes:
> =

> >Compiling the next code (fatal.c):
> =

> >    main()
> >    {
> >        void *test(void)
> >        {
> >            printf("test\n");
> >                return test;
> >        }
> >        void *test(void);
> >    }
> =

> >gives:
> =

> >    cc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
> =

> >...
> =

> >Testing this code on another Linux computer shows that is probably
> >not a hardware problem.
> =

> >A gcc-compiler (2.5.3) on the HP/UX platform did also exit with
> >fatal signal:
> =

> >    fatal.c: In function `main':
> >    fatal.c:10: internal error--unrecognizable insn:
> >    (insn 28 26 29 (set (reg:SI 109)
> >            (nil)) -1 (nil)
> >        (nil))
> >    gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 6
> =

> >This makes me conclude that it is a compiler bug.
> =

>     I have confirmed this problem on my Linux system (Pentium, v1.2.13,
> gcc v2.7.0) and on a Sun SPARCStation IPX (SunOS v4.1.x, gcc v2.3.3).
> =

>     Signal 11 is SIGSEGV (on my Linux system), so it looks like gcc has
> a pointer problem for at least versions 2.3.3, 2.5.3, and 2.7.0.
> =

>     Do the GCC developers test their code with any of the Q/A tools
> that are available (i.e. Insure++, Purify, etc.) ?
> =

> Dean Schulze
I got the "signal 11" error while compiling some tcl/tk-stuff. The configur=
e
appended "-L/usr/lib" to the command lines. Removing this comiling ran the
sig 11 error dissapeared.

Who can explain?

Greetings =

Berthold H=F6llmann
-- =

email: hoel@hamburg.GermanLloyd.de

These opinions might be mine, but never those of my employer.