Re: slib and scm_shell() conflicts
William Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > > I checked out a recent guile repo days ago. It seems there're some > conflictions between slib and scm_shell() function. > > Basically, when i try to load slib(i.e., guile.init), and invoke > scm_shell() thereafter, then the program will block there. `top' shows > the program is consuming lots of cpu time. > > I have attached a reproducible testcase, consisting of three files, > foo.c, foo.scm and Makefile. > > System Info: > > - Guile 1.9.0 > - Debian Unstable GNU/Linux 2.6.14.3 #4, ppc > - slib in cvs and debian repo > - gcc (GCC) 4.0.3 20060104 (prerelease) (Debian 4.0.2-6) Further investigation, see below. But don't know what does "Corrupted DWARF expression." mean... -8<- 5934 res = scm_primitive_eval_x (exp); (gdb) Program received signal SIGINT, Interrupt. 0x0fd5c424 in pthread_getspecific () from /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (gdb) Single stepping until exit from function pthread_getspecific, which has no line number information. deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:4635 4635 return proc; (gdb) where #0 deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:4635 #1 0x0ff38378 in deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:4201 #2 0x0ff36588 in scm_dapply (proc=0x300d9330, arg1=0x404, args=) at eval.c:4990 #3 0x0ff34c74 in scm_apply (proc=0x300d9320, arg1=0x309f3b20, args=) at eval.c:4798 #4 0x0ff35b24 in scm_call_2 (proc=0x300d9320, arg1=0x309f3b20, arg2=) at eval.c:4665 #5 0x0ff35be4 in expand_user_macros (expr=0x300d9870, env=0x300d9830) at eval.c:693 #6 0x0ff34964 in m_expand_body (forms=0x3010df60, env=0x300fe318) at eval.c:749 #7 0x0ff38144 in deval (x=0x3008eb40, env=0x300fe318) at eval.c:3378 #8 0x0ff388ec in deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:3458 #9 0x0ff3d4a0 in scm_primitive_eval_x (exp=0x300fe8a8) at eval.c:5899 #10 0x0ff59724 in scm_primitive_load (filename=) at load.c:109 #11 0x0ff372dc in deval (x=0x30121078, env=0x30121090) at eval.c:4221 #12 0x0ff25354 in scm_start_stack (id=0x300783c0, exp=0x3005cb00, env=0x30121090) at debug.c:454 #13 0x0ff25a5c in scm_m_start_stack (exp=, env=0x30121090) at debug.c:470 #14 0x0ff36398 in scm_dapply (proc=, arg1=0x3005cb38, args=) at eval.c:4860 #15 0x0ff368d4 in deval (x=0x3005cb38, env=0x30121090) at eval.c:4048 #16 0x0ff36588 in scm_dapply (proc=0x300cf150, arg1=0x404, args=) at eval.c:4990 #17 0x0ff34c74 in scm_apply (proc=0x301210e0, arg1=0x404, args=) at eval.c:4798 #18 0x0ff3d588 in scm_call_0 (proc=0x10012008) at eval.c:4653 #19 0x0ff3fe10 in apply_thunk (thunk=0x10012008) at fluids.c:390 #20 0x0ff3fef4 in scm_c_with_fluid (fluid=0x1001aed0, value=0x4, cproc=0xff3fe00 , cdata=0x301210e0) at fluids.c:453 #21 0x0ff3ff60 in scm_with_fluid (fluid=0x10012008, value=0x300d9870, thunk=0xff1ecd0) at fluids.c:440 #22 0x0ff392ac in deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:4470 #23 0x0ff36588 in scm_dapply (proc=0x300cf2d8, arg1=0x404, args=) at eval.c:4990 #24 0x0ff34c74 in scm_apply (proc=0x301212a0, arg1=0x404, args=) at eval.c:4798 #25 0x0ff3d588 in scm_call_0 (proc=0x10012008) at eval.c:4653 #26 0x0ff29e78 in scm_dynamic_wind (in_guard=0x30121258, thunk=0x301212a0, out_guard=0x30121230) at dynwind.c:107 #27 0x0ff392ac in deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:4470 #28 0x0ff36294 in scm_dapply (proc=0x30121380, arg1=, args=) at eval.c:4986 #29 0x0ff34c74 in scm_apply (proc=0x30121370, arg1=0x404, args=) at eval.c:4798 #30 0x0ff3d588 in scm_call_0 (proc=0x10012008) at eval.c:4653 #31 0x0ffa19e4 in scm_body_thunk (body_data=) at throw.c:356 #32 0x0ffa152c in scm_c_catch (tag=0x10015750, body=0xffa19d0 , body_data=0x7fa17c38, handler=0xffa1a00 , handler_data=0x7fa17c48, pre_unwind_handler=0, pre_unwind_handler_data=0x7fa17c4c) at throw.c:204 #33 0x0ffa1f60 in scm_catch_with_pre_unwind_handler (key=0x10012008, thunk=, handler=0x30121338, pre_unwind_handler=0x7fa170b4) at throw.c:583 #34 0x0ff51ab8 in scm_gsubr_apply (args=) at gsubr.c:220 #35 0x0ff36418 in scm_dapply (proc=, arg1=0x30065cf0, args=) at eval.c:4908 #36 0x0ff3932c in deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:4393 #37 0x0ff398f8 in deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:3580 #38 0x0ff36588 in scm_dapply (proc=0x300d1af8, arg1=0x300d1af8, args=) at eval.c:4990 #39 0x0ff34c74 in scm_apply (proc=0x30121938, arg1=0x404, args=) at eval.c:4798 #40 0x0ff3d588 in scm_call_0 (proc=0x10012008) at eval.c:4653 #41 0x0ff29e78 in scm_dynamic_wind (in_guard=0x301218f0, thunk=0x30121938, out_guard=0x301218c8) at dynwind.c:107 #42 0x0ff392ac in deval (x=dwarf2_read_address: Corrupted DWARF expression. ) at eval.c:4470 #43 0x0ff3d4a0 in scm_primitive_eval_x (exp=0x30121a48) at eval.c:5899
Re: guile-gnome and guile-gtk
I should have qualified that to say that guile-gtk doesn't build due to the autoconf thing. guile-gnome is based on pkg-config (and gtk2) But my question stands? Is anyone working on them? Are we waiting for g-wrap 2.0? Or have people lost interest? -Aaron On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 12:20 -0600, Aaron VanDevender wrote: > Is guile-gnome a dead project? It has been almost a year since the last > release, and there hasn't been much traffic on the guile-gnome list. Is > anyone planning a gtk2 based version of gulie-gtk and guile-gnome? > > The last version doesn't even build on my system because it uses > autoconf macros which are based on -config scripts and everything has > since moved over to pkgconfig. > > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Plead the First. ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Re: slib and scm_shell() conflicts
On Feb 20, 2006, at 22:34, William Xu wrote: But don't know what does "Corrupted DWARF expression." mean... DWARF is the name of the new debug info format used in ELF object files. This suggests a bug in either gcc or gdb (or, possibly, binutils), and should be reported if you can figure out which one has the problem. Unfortunately I don't know enough about available DWARF tools to help you with that. :-( It looks like it only happens in deval, and only in some places there. Try removing the object file with that function, rebuild with the --save-temps compiler option added, and (assuming the resulting executable still shows the problem), send the .i and .s files as attachments in a bug report -- probably to the Debian folks, unless you know that the compiler you've got has no Debian-local patches that could influence this problem. (You could also try getting the latest GDB release from the GNU FTP site, if the Debian one isn't the latest.) Ken ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Re: guile-gnome and guile-gtk
> Or have people lost interest? There's libxm -- xg.c has all the gtk bindings up to the current gtk version, as well as a bunch from pango, and a few from glib. ftp://ccrma-ftp.stanford.edu/pub/Lisp/libxm.tar.gz Lots of examples in the Snd tarball (at the same site). If I remember right, it's not directly compatible at the scheme level with guile-gtk because I'm trying to stay very close to the C API. ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Re: guile-gnome and guile-gtk
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 12:20:57 -0600 Aaron VanDevender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is guile-gnome a dead project? It has been almost a year since the > last release, and there hasn't been much traffic on the guile-gnome > list. Hope not! I am using it 'extensively' for my apps > Is anyone planning a gtk2 based version of gulie-gtk and > guile-gnome? guile-gnome is using gtk2 since the beginning > The last version doesn't even build on my system because it uses > autoconf macros which are based on -config scripts and everything > has since moved over to pkgconfig. I succeeded compiling/installing http://download.gna.org/guile-gnome/releases/guile-gnome-platform-2.7.97.tar.gz on both intel and powerpc box [under debian] without any problems I now 'stricktly' use guile-* and guile-gnome* debian packages, as it's far more comfortable[reliable] for developping and deploying applications [under a debian distro]. Howerver, I had to locally recreate guile-gnome* debian packages to get access the list-store model APIs [see below] Hope this helps David ;; -- the following patch was applied locally on debian source guile-gnome-platform version 2.7.99-4: on /gtk/gnome/overrides/gtk.defs among other things, it fixes the gtk-list-store-* api calls (that wereotherwise missing) ;;; -- patch file starts here --- gtk.defs.old2005-01-24 12:52:58.0 +0100 +++ gtk.defs2006-01-05 23:17:40.0 +0100 @@ -677,7 +677,6 @@ "gtk_combo_new" ;; avoid ignoring gtk_combo_box "gtk_combo_set_*" "gtk_combo_disable_activate" - "gtk_list*" "gtk_old_editable*" "gtk_option_menu*" "gtk_pixmap*" @@ -761,6 +760,33 @@ "gtk_icon_theme_set_search_path" ;; takes array "gtk_icon_theme_get_search_path" ;; returns array +"gtk_list_get_type" +"gtk_list_new" +"gtk_list_insert_items" +"gtk_list_append_items" +"gtk_list_prepend_items" +"gtk_list_remove_items" +"gtk_list_remove_items_no_unref" +"gtk_list_clear_items" +"gtk_list_select_item" +"gtk_list_unselect_item" +"gtk_list_select_child" +"gtk_list_unselect_child" +"gtk_list_child_position" +"gtk_list_set_selection_mode" +"gtk_list_extend_selection" +"gtk_list_start_selection" +"gtk_list_end_selection" +"gtk_list_select_all" +"gtk_list_unselect_all" +"gtk_list_scroll_horizontal" +"gtk_list_scroll_vertical" +"gtk_list_toggle_add_mode" +"gtk_list_toggle_focus_row" +"gtk_list_toggle_row" +"gtk_list_undo_selection" +"gtk_list_end_drag_selection" + "gtk_list_store_set_column_types" "gtk_preview_uninit" ;;; -- patch end ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Re: scm_ documentation
Jon Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > but all I've found is the section on trasitioning from gh_ to scm_, > which isn't very complete. What gh funcs are missing for instance? > and not found several of the scm_ functions which are mentioned in > the gh_ to scm_ transition page. Such as? It's not good to recommend something that's not otherwise documented. (Make sure you're looking at the new 1.8 release manual, it's had some work since 1.6 series.) ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Re: guile-gnome and guile-gtk
guile-gtk is pretty much inactive. guile-gnome seems to work, but I haven't seen much development on g-wrap or guile-gnome. -- Greg Troxel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
