On 2011/11/26 15:15:25, Carl wrote:
On 2011/11/26 15:07:17, dak wrote: > > I'll do so, but frankly, if it _does_ fix 1997, I don't want it
pushed. Do
you > have a reference for Mike's analysis?
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-11/msg00556.html
> > It seems we should rather fix the segfault at its source than hide
one way of
> getting it.
I agree with you.
Any way, your patch does not fix the segfault on Ubuntu 11.10 without specific compilation options, so we can as well forget it, I guess. Mike, any more details regarding your analysis? If we don't have the documentation considered as an essential part of our garbage protection scheme, it might make sense to disable _all_ documentation for testing purposes, and then see whether we get more useful segfaults than previously. http://codereview.appspot.com/5432081/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
