[wxruby-users] wxRuby segfault on exit

[Alex Fenton]

Lucas Levin wrote:
>> I use current 7.10 Ubuntu, so no need to test there to see if it's the 
>> distro. The binary gem you installed was built on that.
>>     
> Does that mean we can assume it the fact I'm running 8.04 that's causing the problem?
> Upgrading to the rc has caused me nothing but trouble, I'll be patient in the future:)
>   
It could be, or it could just be that that version of Ubuntu has 
upgraded to ruby 1.8.6-p114 and that's causing problems. Rather than 
trying to compile wxRuby yourself, you could also see if ruby-1.8.6-p110 
works if you compile it yourself.

http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=426

I will likely move onto 8.04 when it's ready and offered by Ubuntu's 
update manager, so future gems will target that.
>> One thing springs to mind here. The ruby-core team decided it was a good 
>> idea to change bits of ruby's GC code between two patch levels of ruby 
>> 1.8.6 and this created a problem in wxRuby which is now fixed in SVN. 
>> This would show up as something like "object allocation during GC" error 
>> message.
>>     
> Not getting a message like that.
>   
OK, but that's what I would expect if it were this bug that ruby-core 
introduced.
>> Could you try running it under gdb please? The binary is stripped so it 
>> may give anything useful, but worth a shot.
>>     
<snip>
> libselinux? how odd. Unless it runs underneath the hood, I don't think I
> use it.
>   
Unfortunately there's not much useful left in there, because the binary 
in the gem is stripped to reduce size.
>>> If it is of any significance, during installation it said the PrinterDC component would be skipped for some reason.
>>>       
>> That's normal on GTK. If that's the only component being skipped, it's 
>> trying to build everything else including all optional components like 
>> Scintillla, MediaCtrl, OpenGL. wxRuby's configure should detect if these 
>> aren't available and skip them, but it could be that this hasn't 
>> happened and that's the reason for the missing symbol. If we knew the 
>> symbol that would pin it down
>>     
> See the last post for the symbol.
I don't think you've posted it?

alex