[gtk-server] Re: I can't get v1.2.2 to work

Okay, indeed, if you link with GTK1 and your configfile contains a 
GTK_LIB_NAME pointing to GTK2, you will receive a segfault; that has 
happened with me often.

Did you run the accompanyning "configure" script in the sourcepackage 
first? Since this script will create a Makefile for you, depending on 
what it will encounter on your system.

>My mistake. I think that
>
>gtk_init(NULL, NULL)
>really was input by me; I just left it off the transcript.
>
>
>I have now recompiled the program to give some debugging information 
>-ggdb. The relevant Makefile line is:
>CFLAGS =        -ggdb -Wall -I/usr/include/gtk-1.2 
>-I/usr/include/glib-1.2 -I/usr/lib/glib/include    -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
>
>Something about line 451. argv[0] is (void *) 0x0
>Is this likely to be wrong?
>
>It's been years since I've messed around with C. Anyway, here's a 
>transcript of my debugging session (sligthly edited):
>
>mcarter@dali:~$ gdb --args gtk-server stdin log
>...
>*(gdb) b 451*
>*(gdb) run*
>Starting program: /usr/local/bin/gtk-server stdin log
>*gtk_init(NULL, NULL)*
>ok
>*gtk_window_new(0)*
>
>Breakpoint 1, Widget_Gtk (handle=0x807d3e0, name=0x8050f6b "gtk_window_new",
>    amount=0x8050f91 "1", type=0x8050f7b "delete-event", counter=38,
>    arg=0xbffff4a0, buffer=0x8081078 "ok") at gtk-server.c:451
>451                     widget = (GtkWidget*)(*func)(arg[0]);
>*(gdb) print func*
>$1 = (GtkWidget *(*)()) 0x40631670 <gtk_window_new>
>*(gdb) print arg*
>$2 = (void **) 0xbffff4a0
>*(gdb) print arg[0]*
>$3 = (void *) 0x0
>*(gdb) s*
>
>Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
>0x407ee323 in g_type_fundamental () from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
>(gdb)
>
>
>
>
>If we're getting the same values for *arg[0], *then maybe the problem 
>really lies in one of the GTK libraries. Half a moment! I seem to be 
>linking to gtk-1.2. Maybe that's the error.
>Curious, I think I made a daft attempt at installing GTK 1.2 earlier 
>today. It was daft because I I think I had GTK 2 without realising.  So 
>that could be the problem.
>
>I'll report back.
>
>
>
>
>  
>

Other related posts: