From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,2b7c12792df12141
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!news.doubleslash.org!open-news-network.org!news.teledata-fn.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 19:23:45 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Checking Ada against formal specifications.
References: 
 <83d47b94-64bd-41ab-8efe-f142e64bf0f5@s20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>
 	<4a1d4c25$0$31875$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <9eb1c5e1-50ea-4b1c-abf5-fa50ac16a1be@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <9eb1c5e1-50ea-4b1c-abf5-fa50ac16a1be@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4a1d7721$0$32665$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 May 2009 19:23:45 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: a1f8a281.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=:b_LC47;jBFX36K@\WTHGJA9EHlD;3YcB4Fo<]lROoRA^YC2XCjHcbI\Vh?NhncDZ@;9OJDO8_SKFNSZ1n^B98iJ>?XU0^QBZaG
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6043
Date: 2009-05-27T19:23:45+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

xorquewasp@googlemail.com schrieb:
> Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>> xorquewasp@googlemail.com schrieb:
>>> (regardless, the SPARK
>>> binaries crash on my copy of debian
>> Try increasing the stack limit.  Has worked for me.
> 
> I'll give it a go, but it's an actual Segmentation Fault

Yes, likely -fstack-check had not been enabled
when building the SPARK programs (spark, sparksimp, etc.).
There will be a Segmentation Fault then, not Storage_Error
whenever there is a storage error caused by default stack size.

> as opposed to a Storage_Error so I'm more suspicious
> of some sort of strange binary incompatibility.