Re: Reason for segmentation violation

From	Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Reason for segmentation violation
Date	2015-06-16 09:58 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<87d20wyqpj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <e8a4c839-1754-4903-a353-ec6f79c445d0@googlegroups.com> <87oakh24u3.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <33dd7bd9-6510-4924-8d2c-4f2079de4c7b@googlegroups.com> <87a8w11371.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <39fcc3a7-a8f5-4c61-bb65-de028cf50290@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

"Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> writes:

> On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 4:01:00 PM UTC+2, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> writes:
>> <snip>
>> > Yes, I saw an example of shifting in this thread that I'll have a look
>> > at.
>> 
>> Just a heads-up: the posted example was not portable.  I don't know how
>> much you really care about portability.  It's easy to say that you want
>> your code to run on as many systems as possible, but to achieve that you
>> need to know every corner of the language.
>
> OK.  Well I don't know what constitutes being portable, but for
> example running on every architecture that Debian GNU/Linux, *BSD,
> Windows and Mac OS X runs on for example could be a reasonable goal.

That's going to make life much simpler.  (Presuming you mean modern
Windows when you say Windows.)

> But for now I'm happy with it running on my 64-bit machine in both
> Linux and Windows.
>
>> Even doing this:
>> 
>>   unsigned char bytes[N];
>>   ... bytes[1] << 8 ...
>> 
>> with 8-bit chars is not portable because bytes[1] will promote to int.
>> If it's a 16-bit int, the shift will be undefined when the top bit of
>> the byte is set.  bytes[2] << 16 is worse or course, though both are
>> safe on a system with 32-bit ints.
>
> Hm, OK. When you're saying the top bit you mean the sign, whether or
> not it is a positive number?

Not quite.  bytes[1] is unsigned so the deliberately vague term "top bit
of the byte" does not indicate the sign, just the most significant bit
of the value.

Say bytes[1] is 128.  This unsigned char value is promoted to int and it
is this signed integer value of 128 that gets shifted.  On a 16-bit
machine 128 x 2^8 can't be represented as an int, and the C language
standard says that the result is undefined.

> Do you have any alternatives?

You just need to prevent the promotion:

  (unsigned)bytes[1] << 8

But all of your targets have (at least) 32-bit integers, and you never
need to shift more than 16 bits so

  (bytes[0] << 16) + (bytes[1] << 8) + bytes[2]

is portable to your targets.

The use of a union to get the numeric value of three or four consecutive
bytes is not portable to all of your targets, and some will have a
64-bit long, so there is the issue of wasted space using long.

-- 
Ben.

Thread

Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-10 22:32 -0700
  Re: Reason for segmentation violation Xavier Roche <xroche@free.fr.NOSPAM.invalid> - 2015-06-11 07:52 +0200
    Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-11 07:19 -0700
      Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-11 15:46 +0100
      Re: Reason for segmentation violation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-11 11:23 -0700
        Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-11 12:08 -0700
          Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-11 15:44 -0400
            Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-11 12:55 -0700
              Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-11 16:29 -0400
              Re: Reason for segmentation violation gordonb.h0fbo@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-06-17 23:51 -0500
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-17 23:10 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation gordonb.0vo9r@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-06-18 03:30 -0500
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-18 02:40 -0700
          Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-11 21:00 +0100
          Re: Reason for segmentation violation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-11 19:58 -0700
            Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-11 23:42 -0700
              Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-12 08:33 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-12 02:36 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-12 11:07 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-06-12 04:55 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-12 13:17 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-12 13:32 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-12 13:20 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-13 23:55 -0700
                Restrictions on inline functions (Was: Reason for segmentation violation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-14 10:30 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-12 11:10 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 12:46 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-12 08:35 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-12 12:21 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-12 10:48 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-12 19:12 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-12 08:49 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-12 09:13 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-13 08:55 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-12 08:56 -0700
              Re: Reason for segmentation violation glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-12 09:41 +0000
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-12 08:29 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 00:03 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-14 00:58 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 02:14 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-14 04:26 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 06:29 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-14 15:06 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 07:25 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-14 16:59 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 11:51 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-14 16:43 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 14:16 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-14 20:35 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-15 01:19 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 03:57 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-15 12:26 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 04:47 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-15 15:02 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 07:08 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-15 18:56 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 20:09 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-16 09:31 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-16 10:09 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-16 02:36 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-16 11:01 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-16 12:37 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-16 08:40 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-16 10:32 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-17 07:54 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 05:28 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-18 00:34 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 09:13 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-19 21:17 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 23:28 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 05:26 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-15 06:20 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 14:25 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-15 07:52 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 18:29 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-15 11:15 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-18 20:41 +0000
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-15 18:48 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-15 11:04 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-18 20:44 +0000
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-19 10:39 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-06-16 00:58 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-18 20:40 +0000
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-18 17:06 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-18 14:56 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-18 23:04 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-18 18:18 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-19 10:26 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 08:57 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-15 08:54 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 06:24 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-15 14:32 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 05:43 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-14 23:28 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 16:31 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-15 01:27 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 05:34 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-15 15:00 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 20:37 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-16 09:58 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-16 10:37 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 17:51 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 21:02 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-16 00:51 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 22:30 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-17 00:35 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-06-19 18:51 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 22:40 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 23:23 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-16 11:07 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-16 23:54 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 10:51 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 03:46 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 04:17 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 14:02 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 06:15 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 15:34 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 07:58 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 16:04 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 08:16 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 14:57 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-18 15:35 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-18 15:44 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-18 08:18 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-18 16:42 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-17 08:19 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 16:35 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 08:49 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-17 11:56 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 09:46 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-17 09:14 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation gordonb.446bm@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-06-18 01:56 -0500
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 09:54 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-17 09:08 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 16:53 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 16:32 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 18:21 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-22 16:33 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 18:20 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-22 13:05 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 19:47 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 13:52 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 06:05 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 15:39 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 08:02 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 16:12 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 10:46 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-17 16:12 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 08:28 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-18 07:32 +1200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 22:02 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-17 13:16 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 22:32 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 06:52 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-17 16:16 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 22:44 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-17 17:39 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-18 01:57 -0500
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 09:29 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-17 13:57 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 23:10 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-06-17 14:22 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 23:41 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-18 00:40 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 09:18 +0200
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-17 08:52 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 09:27 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-17 11:00 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 07:48 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-14 16:53 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-14 10:59 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 11:45 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-14 20:01 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 12:40 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-14 21:00 +0100
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 13:13 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 13:17 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-14 16:36 -0400
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-06-14 13:43 -0700
                Re: Reason for segmentation violation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-14 14:50 -0400
              Re: Reason for segmentation violation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-12 03:21 -0700
  Re: Reason for segmentation violation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-10 23:07 -0700

csiph-web