Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-23 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 23 09:37, Rainer Emrich wrote: > On Mar 18 16:42, Corinna Vnschen wrote: > >On Mar 18 10:56, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 03:40:48PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> >On Mar 18 11:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> >> In this case the bigger heap seems to avoid the

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-23 Thread Rainer Emrich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 18 16:42, Corinna Vnschen wrote: >On Mar 18 10:56, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 03:40:48PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >On Mar 18 11:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >> On Mar 18 02:08, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> >>

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-18 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 18 10:56, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 03:40:48PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Mar 18 11:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> On Mar 18 02:08, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:47:04AM +, Dave Korn wrote: > >> > >On 11/03/2011 13:53, R

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-18 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 03:40:48PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Mar 18 11:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On Mar 18 02:08, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:47:04AM +, Dave Korn wrote: >> > >On 11/03/2011 13:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: >> > > >> > >> I have to be more

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-18 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 18 11:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mar 18 02:08, Christopher Faylor wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:47:04AM +, Dave Korn wrote: > > >On 11/03/2011 13:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: > > > > > >> I have to be more clear. I increased the heap_chunk_in_mb to 1792 using: > > >> regtool -i

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-18 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 18 02:08, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:47:04AM +, Dave Korn wrote: > >On 11/03/2011 13:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: > > > >> I have to be more clear. I increased the heap_chunk_in_mb to 1792 using: > >> regtool -i set /HKLM/Software/Cygwin/heap_chunk_in_mb 1792 > >

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-17 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:47:04AM +, Dave Korn wrote: >On 11/03/2011 13:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: > >> I have to be more clear. I increased the heap_chunk_in_mb to 1792 using: >> regtool -i set /HKLM/Software/Cygwin/heap_chunk_in_mb 1792 > > I run with this setting all the time, I guess that's

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-17 Thread Dave Korn
On 11/03/2011 13:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: > I have to be more clear. I increased the heap_chunk_in_mb to 1792 using: > regtool -i set /HKLM/Software/Cygwin/heap_chunk_in_mb 1792 I run with this setting all the time, I guess that's why I haven't seen this problem. Before I did that (couple of y

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-11 Thread Rainer Emrich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Corinna, Am 11.03.2011 16:07, schrieb Corinna Vinschen: > Rainer, > > On Mar 11 15:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On Mar 11 15:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> On Mar 11 14:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: I have to be more clear. I increased the heap_ch

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
Rainer, On Mar 11 15:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mar 11 15:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Mar 11 14:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: > > > I have to be more clear. I increased the heap_chunk_in_mb to 1792 using: > > > regtool -i set /HKLM/Software/Cygwin/heap_chunk_in_mb 1792 > > > > But that's

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 11 15:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mar 11 14:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: > > I have to be more clear. I increased the heap_chunk_in_mb to 1792 using: > > regtool -i set /HKLM/Software/Cygwin/heap_chunk_in_mb 1792 > > But that's the size of the application heap, not the size of the > cyghea

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 11 14:53, Rainer Emrich wrote: > > On Mar 11 12:57, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Mar 11 12:57, Rainer Emrich wrote: > >> So, the solution for me was to increase the cygheap size. The maximum > >> seems to > >> be 1792 MBytes. This solves the issue for boostrapping gcc with libjava > >>

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-11 Thread Rainer Emrich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > On Mar 11 12:57, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mar 11 12:57, Rainer Emrich wrote: >> On Mar 1 18:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> > And then ld crashes, because, apparently, it neglects to check the >> > return value of mmap. >> >> Yes it's a fault to

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 11 12:57, Rainer Emrich wrote: > On Mar 1 18:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > And then ld crashes, because, apparently, it neglects to check the > > return value of mmap. > > Yes it's a fault to not check the return value of mmap, but that wouldn't help > here either. > > So, the solution

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-11 Thread Rainer Emrich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 1 18:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mar 1 18:26, Rainer Emrich wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Any news on this issue? >> >> At the moment it's impossible to build libgcj during bootstrap of gcc! >> >> I trie

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-01 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 1 18:57, Rainer Emrich wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Corinna, > > I'm not so sure if that's a ld problem, see the following thread: > > http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2010-12/msg00448.html > > I haven't tried 1.7.6, but as Yaakov mentions there is a chang

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-01 Thread Rainer Emrich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Corinna, I'm not so sure if that's a ld problem, see the following thread: http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2010-12/msg00448.html I haven't tried 1.7.6, but as Yaakov mentions there is a change in behaviour in August last year. Rainer P.S.: please

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-01 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 1 18:26, Rainer Emrich wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Any news on this issue? > > At the moment it's impossible to build libgcj during bootstrap of gcc! > > I tried 1.7.7-1 and the snapshot 20110227. > > Here some diagnostic: > > 288 117500220 [main] ld

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2011-03-01 Thread Rainer Emrich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Any news on this issue? At the moment it's impossible to build libgcj during bootstrap of gcc! I tried 1.7.7-1 and the snapshot 20110227. Here some diagnostic: $ /SCRATCH/tmp.ALIlKIg0qU/gcc-4.5.0-1/gcc-4.5.0-1/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc - -B/SCRATCH

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2010-12-27 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 23:21 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 09:42:24PM -0600, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > >Recently I have been unable to link very large libraries, in particular > >libgcj (from gcc-4.5.x) and libQtWebKit (from qt4): > > > >collect2: ld terminated with sig

Re: ld: fatal error - cmalloc would have returned NULL

2010-12-27 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 09:42:24PM -0600, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: >Recently I have been unable to link very large libraries, in particular >libgcj (from gcc-4.5.x) and libQtWebKit (from qt4): > >collect2: ld terminated with signal 1 [Hangup] > 2 [main] ld 5544 C:\cygwin17\usr\i686-pc-cygwin\b