Re: build error

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "d.henman" <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:36:55 +0900
> cc: 
> 
> In end of data:
> bytecomp.el:4255:1:Warning: the function `compilation-forget-errors' is not
>     known to be defined.
> Wrote /usr/cvs/emacs/lisp/emacs-lisp/bytecomp.elc
> Compiling /usr/cvs/emacs/lisp/subr.el
> Fatal error (6)/bin/sh: line 4:  3088 Aborted                 (core dumped) 
> EMACSLOADPATH=/usr/cvs/emacs/lisp ../src/bootstrap-emacs.exe -batch 
> --no-site-file --multibyte -f batch-byte-compile-if-not-done $el
> make[2]: *** [compile] Error 1
> 
> --- end of paste
> 
> I get from this, that subr.el is the file being compliled when core is 
> dumped, and
> that this is a compiler fatal error #6 ?

Yes.  Fatal error 6 is SIGABRT (see your signal.h header file), as the
"Aborted" part says.  If Emacs was aborted, it means that Emacs exited
abnormally, most probably via the call to the `abort' function.  The
Emacs sources routinely place the calls to that function where there
are situations that ``cannot happen'', in order to force a core dump
that can be debugged to find the reasons.

But it could also be that /bin/sh (presumably the Cygwin port of Bash)
was the one who aborted, in which case it's a more complicated problem
than just an Emacs bug.

>  or line #4 in some file (can't be the .el file)and 3088 being I don't now a 
> line# or error #.

It should be line 4 in some shell script, perhaps generated by Make.
3088 is the PID of the process that crashed, I think.

> There is a "bootstrap-emacs.exe.stackdump"  being created in the lisp 
> directory.

That's the Cygwin equivalent of the core dump file.  And it seems to
tell that it was Emacs who crashed, not Bash.

As Richard says, it's better to run bootstrap-emacs under GDB, place a
breakpoint in the `abort' function, and when it breaks, look around to
find out why it wound up calling `abort'.

Btw, isn't this a problem similar to what is described in etc/PROBLEMS
(look under "Building the Cygwin port for MS-Windows can fail with
some GCC versions")?  Are you sure you are using one of the GCC
versions named there as ``safe''?