On 2011-08-18, at 10:11 , Carl Sorensen wrote: > On 8/17/11 10:41 PM, "Dan Eble" <d...@faithful.be> wrote: > >> What I have so far is a backtrace: >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-08/msg00494.html >> and a large amount of input spread across many files, which is why I chose to >> review the lilypond source first. >> >> It may also be of interest that I am generating PartCombineMusic with scheme >> functions other than the stock part combiner. >> -- > Two questions: > > 1) Is the segfault repeatable?
After extensive testing, the answer is yes, but it's complicated. It is repeatable, but the result doesn't depend only on the input. When I build, I prefer to use a program called "color" that captures standard output and standard error and highlights the errors. Here's what happens. In the following list, X is a makefile target, and Y is the lilypond command line that "make X" runs. color make X -> crash make X -> OK time make X -> OK color Y -> OK Y -> OK time Y -> OK make X 2>err.txt >out.txt -> OK > 2) If so, can you test it on the latest development release? I tried Graham's experimental 2.15.9 (from last week) and it worked fine at first, but then I tried running it via gdb and it crashed with similar but not identical backtrace as 2.14.2. (The caller of kill_mmrest is Part_combine_iterator::process instead of Part_combine_iterator::unisono). -- Dan _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
