> Hi Brian,
> I apologise for the lack of information that I have provided in my
> previous message.
> Portaudio provides the ability to create cross platform audio I/O
> libraries ( http://www.portaudio.com). That aside, I am using the
> latest version of Cygwin (all stable release packages), and the latest
> version of Portaudio.
> To configure, compile, and install Portaudio in Cygwin, I used
> './configure', then 'make', and then finally 'make install'. The
> process went perfectly, apart from the need to use 'autoreconf' before
> starting the process to recreate the 'configure' file. I have
> attempted using Portaudio with static libraries, and also shared
> Everytime I start my binary, I always end up with that exception fault
> displayed in my previous message. I will run the debug sequence, and
> have a look at what is going on.
> On 21/10/06, Brian Dessent <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Hugh McMaster wrote:
> > > I can successfully compile and install Portaudio in Cygwin (after
> > > performing autoreconf). I have been using dynamic libraries
> > > (specifically cygportaudio-2.dll) I can even compile my own sources.
> > > When attempting to run the resulting Win32 binary, I get an error,
> > > that I cannot even begin to make sense of.
> > I have no idea what portaudio is, and I'm sure I'm not alone. It's not
> > an official Cygwin package. I'm sure I could google it, and find its
> > homepage, and read a little bit about it, and maybe dig around and find
> > a tarball somewhere.
> > Even if I had that information I have no idea what options, methods, or
> > patches you used to compile it, or what commands or options you used to
> > invoke it, or what files you supplied as input, or really what you were
> > trying to do with it. In other words, you've given almost no useful
> > information. It's kind of the analog of walking into a room of complete
> > strangers and asking, "Hey does anyone know what's up with Steve?"
> > (Who's Steve?)
> > > Exception: STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION at eip=0048C2C0
> > This means there was an access violation exception. This is Windows-ese
> > for "Segmentation fault". It is a generic error that occurs when a
> > process tries to access a page of memory that it does not have access
> > to. This can be caused by hundreds of different things - dereferencing
> > a NULL or otherwise uninitialized pointer, walking off the end of an
> > unterminated buffer, stack corruption, and on and on. It is a very
> > generic symptom of a bug in the code, or a logic error in the code, or
> > false assumptions about the environment the code will be executing in,
> > or any number of other problems.
> > In other words, you'll have to actually debug the program. The address
> > of the fault (0x004xxxxx) does imply that it is happening in the main
> > binary image and not a DLL, but that's not a given either. Compile with
> > debugging symbols (-g) and use gdb and figure out what's going on. Or
> > use the error_start parameter of $CYGWIN to launch the debugger at the
> > fault instead of the default action of creating the .stackdump file.
> > > Stack trace:
> > > Frame Function Args
> > > 5ED4CCB8 0048C2C0 (00000000, 00290A60, 00001000, 67144A5D)
> > > 5ED4CCF8 67145B1F (002848E0, 5ED4CD5C, 002917F0, 00000002)
> > > 5ED4CDB8 671498A5 (00284890, 5ED4CDF0, 671496B0, 5ED4CDF0)
> > > 671496B0 61004416 (00ACEC81, 4D8B0000, 9445C708, 00000000)
> > A naked stack trace of self-compiled code does not do any good. We have
> > no idea what those addresses correspond to.
> > > Does anyone know what is wrong with the library file that has been
> > > created on Cygwin? Should I completely reinstall Cygwin?
> > Please forgive the following analogy.
> > Reinstalling is the equivalent of popping the hood, staring at the
> > engine for a while, then closing the hood and trying to turn it over
> > again -- it doesn't actually do anything to fix the underlying problem,
> > unless that problem was a loose hood. And if it does work it was a
> > coincidence, just as sometimes letting the engine cool off will allow it
> > to start again. But in those cases it would have also worked if you had
> > just sat there for a while twiddling your thumbs and so it certainly
> > wasn't due to opening the hood and staring.
> > Brian