Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!riley
From: riley@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: surf: mine's flakey too
Message-ID: <6756@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Date: 4 Nov 88 19:03:21 GMT
References: <1157@client2.DRETOR.UUCP> <3f7240ce.5e37@dl5e37.engin.umich.edu> <5069@thorin.cs.unc.edu>
Reply-To: riley@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley)
Organization: Cornell Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca NY
Lines: 15

In article <5069@thorin.cs.unc.edu> bell@unc.UUCP (Andrew Bell) writes:
>In article <3f7240ce.5e37@dl5e37.engin.umich.edu> beh@caen.engin.umich.edu (Bob Hruska) writes:
>>No, the binaries were just fine.  I was able to run surf just fine.  All 
>>I did was raise the stack size to 20000.  This was on a 512K machine.
>
>Would it be that hard to add a little routine to surf to check on stack size?

Lattice C by default checks the stack size at each function entry.  The
makefile for Lattice that comes with surf doesn't turn this option off, and
I thought the binary distributed was compiled with Lattice.  If yes, then
it should be checking the stack.  (note that I haven't yet set my stack to
2K and run it, to find out for sure...)

-Dan Riley (dsr@lns61.tn.cornell.edu, dsr@crnlns.bitnet)
-Wilson Lab, Cornell U.