issue with gcc 4.x optimizations

[Andrew Haley]

Martin Quinson writes:
 > For information, I've solved my issue. A part of my code was doing an
 > overflow in an array stored on the stack. It looks like %ebx is stored right
 > after user data, but only reused with dynamic linking and some optimizations
 > enabled (or so).
 > 
 > That is why it worked without optimization: I was overwritting a useless
 > value in that case.
 > 
 > Hoo-ray!
 > 
 > I am deeply sorry for this list polution.

Thanks for letting us know.  FYI, -fstack-protector might have helped.

Andrew.