Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #71765

Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV

From Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV
Date 2015-10-03 16:52 -0700
Organization None to speak of
Message-ID <ln7fn3zf14.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink)
References (16 earlier) <lnlhbl10ot.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <mumre9$htn$1@dont-email.me> <32488046-f029-4722-ac30-b99be6a05b26@googlegroups.com> <lnsi5szjuy.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <f6e37ed1-695e-42bd-87ad-a480cdae4e1e@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


supercat@casperkitty.com writes:
> On Friday, October 2, 2015 at 10:55:44 PM UTC-5, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> That would mean that if I accidentally wrote:
>> 
>>     int n;
>>     /* hundreds of lines of code */
>>     long *ptr = &n;
>> 
>> then the compiler probably wouldn't warn me *if* I happened to use a
>> compiler where they're both 32 bits.  Then when I try to recompile on a
>> 64-bit system, it fails to compile.
>
> My intention is by no means to require that compilers be required to regard
> "int" and "long" as equivalent, but merely that the Standard recognize that
> a compiler may *at its option* document the types as equivalent (likewise
> on 16-bit systems for "short" and "int"), preferably defining macros with
> some standardized names if it does so, and that code which tests for a
> macro indicating such equivalence may, if the macro is defined, legitimately
> regard the types as equivalent.

You keep using the word "equivalent".  It's not clear what that's
supposed to mean.  Do you mean "compatible" (a term that's defined
in the Standard)?

In C as it's currently defined, int and long are *never* compatible.
I wouldn't want to change that.  (And of course that eliminates
the need for a macro that tells me whether they're equivalent --
other than __STDC__.)

>> I *like* the fact that types can be distinct even if they have the same
>> representation.
>
> I like the fact that types *can* be distinct.  Indeed, I wish C provided an
> ability to create types with the same storage layout as other type without
> then being equivalent; such a thing could greatly facilitate optimizations,
> though for such a feature to be really useful it should be coupled with a an
> "__unalias(void *p, size_t length)" function or intrinsic, such that the
> result of writing a block of memory as any type, calling __unalias on the
> block, and then reading the block as any other type would be equivalent to
> having all of the writes and reads performed on the underlying "char"
> representations.  I think such functionality could be achieved by:
>
>     void __unalias(void *p, size_t length)
>     {
>       unsigned char *pp = p;
>       while(length--)
>       {
>         *pp+=0;  // Even if *pp was part of some other type, I think this
>                  // would force the compiler to treat it as "unsigned char".
>       }
>     }
>
> though of course on many compilers that would be ridiculously inefficient.
> On many compilers, __unalias() could be a macro that expands to nothing;
> only in rare cases would it actually have to generate any code other beyond
> flushing any cached register values that might be aliased to any memory in
> the indicated range.

You're proposing a *lot* of complex machinery for, in my opinion, not
much benefit.

You can define a new type that's distinct from any other type by
defining a struct.  That doesn't give you integer operations, of course.
Then again, if you want C++, you know where to find it.

>> As for int32_t, I do agree that there's a potential problem.  The intN_t
>> types were added on top of C's existing system of integer types, and
>> each of them is defined as a typedef of one of those existing types.
>> That means that the choice of *which* type int32_t is compatible with
>> will vary from one compiler to another, and if both int and long qualify
>> then the choice is arbitrary.  Which means that if I write code that
>> depends on which other integer types int32_t is compatible with, I can
>> get into trouble.  (This can be an issue for generic selections, which
>> require all the listed types to be distinct.)
>
> While it would certainly be desirable to be consistent in one's use of
> integer types, code sometimes has to deal with libraries written by other
> people who don't always use the same types, and for which source code may
> not always be available.  If a system only has one representation for 32-
> bit unsigned values, and I have a method (object code only) written by
> someone else with a signature:
>
>     void do_something(int command, void* buffer, size_t size);
>
> and a certain command is documented as filling the supplied buffer with
> 32-bit values, but doesn't specify which particular type it used, should
> code be required to use something like the nasty __unalias routine above
> to force the compiler to regard everything in the buffer as having
> effective type "unsigned char" prior to reading it as any 32-bit type?

If a library doesn't have adequate documentation, no change to the
language is going to make it easy to use.  If a library provides
a function only as object code, without so much as a .h file that
declares it, that's the library's problem.  (I don't think I've ever
encountered such a library; have you?)

> Which is more helpful:
>
> 1. Having a means by which code can say "I need to be able to interpret
>    the bytes in this buffer as type X regardless of how it was written", or
>
> 2. Allowing a whole-program optimizer that can somehow figure out that a
>    buffer cannot have been written with e.g. "unsigned long" or any form
>    of "char", would be entitled to regard as unreachable any code which
>    tried to read out the buffer as "unsigned long" unless the programmer
>    has taken the precaution of byte-copying the buffer in a way that would
>    prevent the compiler from keeping information about the effective type.
>
>> An alternative would have been to define [u]intN_t and friends as
>> distinct types, perhaps using some newly invented syntax for defining
>> new integer types.
>
> What I would prefer as a default behavior would be to have a compiler regard
> the xxx_t types as being distinct from "int" and company for purposes of
> generating warnings, but as being compatible types for purposes of aliasing
> optimizations.

Then talk to the compiler vendors about the warnings you want.
Currently, C *never* requires warnings.  Syntax errors and constraint
violations require diagnostics, which may be either fatal or non-fatal;
any such violation permits a compiler to reject the program altogether.

>> But there's an incredibly simple solution, at least to the narrow
>> problem you mentioned:
>> 
>>     void foo(int32_t x);
>>     void foo(int x);
>> 
>> Just don't do that.  It's (mildly) annoying that the above may or may
>> not compile depending on how int32_t is defined, but the solution is to
>> use the same type name in both declarations.  We've just spent a great
>> deal of time discussing how to do that.
>
> If one has control over both the caller-side and callee-side code, that's
> great.  If one has object files and headers for one piece of outside code
> that needs to receive a buffer pointer as type "int*" and another that
> needs to receive it as "long*", and if there is no realistic likelihood of
> migrating the code to work on any platform where those types don't have
> the same representation,
[snip]

If you have headers and object files for this outside code, then a
compiler is unlikely to perform optimization across 

[...]

> I would suggest that equivalence any particular combinations of types which
> could legally have equivalent behavior (e.g. a 32-bit "int", "int32_t", and
> a 32-bit "long") should be regarded as an "optional feature", such that a
> compiler would be allowed to accept or reject:
>
>     void foo(int     *x);
>     void foo(int32_t *x);
>
> and *independently* accept or reject:
>
>     void foo(long    *x);
>     void foo(int32_t *x);
>
> but if it accepts the former it would be required to regard the types as
> equivalent everywhere (including aliasing), and if it accepts the latter
> it would likewise be required to regard those types as equivalent everywhere.

If by "equivalent" you mean "compatible", then I disagree.  Different
libraries using different types can be a problem; your proposed solution
is IMHO worse.

> The requirement given above is probably closer to the intention of the spec
> than its meaningless "issue at least one diagnostic", but would be far more
> useful.  At present, if a programmer writes:
>
>     int main(int argc)
>     {
>       if (argc == 5)
>         printf("Hey!");
>       else
>       {
>         int p;
>         int32_t *q = &p;
>         *q=23;
>       }
>       return 0;
>     }
>
> there is no requirement that a compiler indicate whether it regards the
> assignment of &p to q as valid.  The compiler must output a diagnostic
> message if it doesn't, but since a compiler which simply printed a random
> message at the end of every compilation (even when fed a strictly-conforming
> program) would satisfy that requirement I don't see it as very useful.

Sure, a compiler can be conforming without being useful.

It is implementation-defined whether int and int32_t are compatible,
which means that bad code like the above may or may not be diagnosed.  A
compiler that remembers that q was defined as an int32_t*, and that
issues a warning based on that, could be quite useful.  A change to the
standard that would mandate such a warning would IMHO be a good thing,
but I'm not sure how to do that without breaking existing valid code
and/or making the language unreasonably complicated.


-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:02 +0200
  Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-09-24 19:51 -0700
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 14:09 +0200
  Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2015-09-25 04:32 +0000
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 14:09 +0200
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-25 22:07 +0000
      Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-25 18:46 -0400
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-26 10:57 +1200
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-25 21:40 -0700
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-26 16:51 +1200
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-26 10:45 +0100
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-26 03:39 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-26 12:20 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-26 06:39 -0700
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 01:45 -0700
      Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 23:11 +0200
  Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-09-25 10:28 +0200
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-25 10:33 +0000
      Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 14:05 +0200
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-25 16:44 +0000
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 14:08 +0200
  Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-25 10:55 +0100
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 14:00 +0200
      Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 09:40 -0700
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-25 20:25 +0100
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2015-09-25 19:07 -0700
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-26 10:47 +0100
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-26 10:34 -0400
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-26 15:28 +0000
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-26 17:32 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-27 09:59 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-30 02:52 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-30 20:13 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 16:00 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-28 08:17 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-30 04:00 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-01 09:34 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-10-01 19:05 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-02 08:25 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 16:02 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 12:57 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-06 09:23 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-07 11:18 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 13:52 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 09:51 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-29 11:07 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 15:09 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-30 07:34 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-30 10:33 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-30 11:14 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-30 12:26 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-30 11:58 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-10-01 19:16 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:21 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-10-01 19:27 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-01 07:58 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-01 21:52 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 16:10 -0700
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-27 11:15 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-28 08:47 +0000
  Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Andrew Cooper <amc96@cam.ac.uk> - 2015-09-26 00:02 +0100
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 00:02 +0200
  Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-26 23:32 -0700
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 22:10 +0200
      Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-27 17:01 -0400
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-27 22:15 +0100
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 23:36 +0200
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 23:33 +0200
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:40 +1300
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 23:58 +0200
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 11:08 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 00:25 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 12:50 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 02:06 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:15 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 02:20 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:24 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 02:44 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:50 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-09-27 23:44 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 20:17 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-28 01:06 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-28 16:59 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-28 09:23 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-29 07:47 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-28 13:46 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-29 07:52 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 10:15 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-02 09:55 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-02 11:59 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-10-03 11:51 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-03 15:25 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 14:50 -0700
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-09-27 18:32 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-09-27 17:37 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-27 17:50 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-28 18:18 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-28 11:31 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-29 07:37 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-09-27 17:38 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-09-27 17:39 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:42 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 02:46 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-02 09:56 +0000
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-27 18:20 -0400
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-27 15:54 -0700
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-09-27 18:23 -0400
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 00:33 +0200
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 11:42 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 01:04 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 12:32 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 01:37 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-27 16:53 -0700
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-28 00:21 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 01:30 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-28 00:41 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 01:52 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 12:59 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-28 17:07 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-30 11:17 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-09-30 06:08 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-27 17:09 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 02:17 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-28 09:00 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV ais523 <ais523@nethack4.org> - 2015-10-01 14:05 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 16:23 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-01 10:26 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-01 16:53 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-01 11:26 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-01 21:57 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-01 13:30 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-01 13:57 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-10-01 17:19 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-01 15:38 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-01 17:14 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 14:19 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 15:01 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-04 18:26 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 17:53 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-10-04 18:37 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-04 19:13 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 17:57 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-10-04 21:57 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-05 01:53 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-05 09:37 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 14:10 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-09 14:35 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-10 11:43 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-12 09:17 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-12 12:32 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-12 14:12 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-12 14:52 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-13 03:00 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-12 23:34 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-14 11:00 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-14 08:34 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-14 11:34 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-14 11:57 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-15 00:03 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-15 10:57 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-20 16:06 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-17 07:32 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-17 07:51 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-17 15:51 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-02 10:09 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-10-02 08:55 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-02 08:59 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-02 17:35 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-03 10:02 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-03 16:11 -0500
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-10-03 17:27 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-03 16:58 -0500
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-03 15:16 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-03 18:21 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-10-03 18:23 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-03 18:52 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-03 16:16 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-03 19:13 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-03 23:34 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 07:09 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 14:43 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-04 03:19 -0500
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 14:48 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 16:26 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-02 13:21 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-10-02 17:05 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-02 15:11 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-02 20:55 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-03 12:00 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-03 16:52 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 14:40 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-01 22:02 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-02 10:09 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-02 08:19 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-02 03:17 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-02 13:02 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-10-01 18:33 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-10-01 11:17 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-01 17:06 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-01 11:45 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-02 10:21 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-02 11:36 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-02 11:44 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-02 13:24 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-02 15:31 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-02 18:04 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-02 18:21 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-02 21:04 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 08:29 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-03 16:47 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-03 17:37 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-03 17:54 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-04 18:16 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 18:13 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-04 18:22 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 20:17 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-04 21:07 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 22:10 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 09:24 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 22:15 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 10:38 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 23:02 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 11:10 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 23:51 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 11:56 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 07:38 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-04 23:51 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 23:44 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 11:52 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-05 00:09 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 13:00 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-04 17:14 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-10-05 09:40 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-05 18:32 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-10-05 21:59 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-05 01:13 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-06 17:14 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 14:56 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-02 16:31 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 20:11 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-10-02 09:18 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 20:14 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-02 10:20 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-04 14:03 +0000
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-01 09:28 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-01 18:53 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-02 06:26 +0200
                Generating header files  (Was: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2015-10-01 13:40 -0400
                Re: Generating header files (Was: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 23:58 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 14:06 -0700
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-27 21:05 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 10:26 +0200
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-27 21:15 -0400
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-09-28 09:52 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 10:36 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-09-28 10:40 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-28 15:55 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 01:16 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-29 00:26 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 10:34 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-29 15:50 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-29 11:16 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-29 16:22 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-29 13:15 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-29 18:56 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-29 07:04 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 00:07 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-29 18:13 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-09-29 21:57 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-30 01:57 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-09-30 06:01 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:11 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 14:12 +0100
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:15 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-30 08:40 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-30 22:28 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-30 22:31 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-09-30 16:53 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-30 23:19 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-30 23:32 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-09-30 18:17 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 03:19 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-30 22:01 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 00:46 +0200
      Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-27 17:44 -0700
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:51 +1300
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-27 18:04 -0700
            Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 03:39 +0200
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-27 22:03 -0400
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 04:16 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-28 15:19 +1300
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 04:23 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 14:11 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 00:15 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-29 18:14 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 00:41 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-27 19:58 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 10:43 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 00:16 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 15:51 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:37 +0200
                Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-09-30 09:12 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 17:34 +0100
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-09-30 11:29 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 20:00 +0100
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-09-30 12:49 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 22:26 +0100
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-09-30 16:27 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-01 09:56 +0100
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 03:08 +0200
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-30 13:10 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-01 09:23 +1300
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-30 19:02 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-01 03:12 +0100
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-01 11:15 +0100
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-01 11:36 +0100
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-01 05:49 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-01 16:41 +0200
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-01 15:16 +1300
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-30 19:10 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-01 15:20 +1300
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-10-01 01:26 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-01 02:16 -0700
                Re: Strings (was Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV) Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-01 08:34 -0500
              Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-27 19:06 -0700
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 04:18 +0200
                Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-27 21:32 -0700
  Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-27 07:54 -0700
    Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 17:16 +0200
      Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-09-27 11:21 -0400
        Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-27 08:59 -0700
          Re: Unexpected and difficult to understand SIGSEGV "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 00:16 +0200

csiph-web