Re: [Chicken-hackers] How to interpret chicken post mortem?

[Jörg F . Wittenberger]

Am 26.11.2015 um 11:34 schrieb Peter Bex:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 11:29:20AM +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote:
>> Something is definitely wrong at master and it is non-deterministic.
>>
>> I may be able to help narrowing this down, since I get these segfaults
>> within minutes.  But I lack any idea what to look for by now.
>>
>> Most of the time I get a segfault, that is.  (NB: No matter whether or
>> not I run with -:S the segfault is never caught.)
>>
>> Sometimes I just get weird results.  This also happened in csc, though
>> only once while compiling 102 modules totaling ~100000 lines of code:
>>
>> ====
>> Note: in toplevel procedure `cntrl#ball-control-default':
>>   expected value of type boolean in conditional but were given a value
>> of type
>>   `string' which is always true:
>>
>> (if (let ((g10816 key)) (trstcntl#x509-subject-hash cert))
>>   (let ((t10269 ...)) (let (...) (util#remove-file ...)))
>>   (##core#undefined))
>>
>> Error: (assq) bad argument type: #<invalid immediate object>
> 
> Do you also get this when compiling said code with the 4.10.1 snapshot?

So far i did not try.

Actually I've been slightly incorrect: I compiled this code several
times.  Only once I observed the error from csc.  (And once more, maybe;
1st time recall only vaguely to have ignored "something weird" and had
to recompile anyway.)

So chances to reproduce it are basically nil.  Especially when taking
into account that it may be any kind of error I'd expect.

I'll try to recompile it a couple of times in a loop.  (Which will take
days to complete.)

I'll report when it breaks.

/Jörg

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature