bug#21104: 25.0.50; relative paths are added to load-path without -nsl (bug#21104)

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 20:00:21 +0100
> From: Anders Lindgren <andlind@gmail.com>
> Cc: Keith David Bershatsky <esq@lawlist.com>
> 
> It looks like the call to `set_per_buffer_value' is causing this. This is the
> backtrace at this point:
> 
> #0 0x000000010010d4c9 in set_per_buffer_value [inlined] () at
> /Users/anderslindgren/build/emacs-25/src/buffer.h:1080
> #1 0x000000010010d4c9 in store_symval_forwarding (valcontents=0x101898ac8,
> newval=4304500124, buf=0x100900a98) at data.c:1080
> #2 0x00000001001583c6 in exec_byte_code (bytestr=4320758472,
> vector=140734799802712, maxdepth=140734799802488, args_template=2, nargs=0,
> args=0x7fff5fbff250) at bytecode.c:842
> #3 0x0000000100122ad9 in apply_lambda (fun=4298488197, args=<value temporarily
> unavailable, due to optimizations>, count=3) at eval.c:2794
> #4 0x0000000100120c9e in eval_sub (form=<value temporarily unavailable, due to
> optimizations>) at eval.c:2241
> #5 0x000000010012353c in Feval (form=4320886083, lexical=<value temporarily
> unavailable, due to optimizations>) at eval.c:1988
> #6 0x000000010011fa43 in internal_condition_case (bfun=0x1000b1d60
> <top_level_2>, handlers=<value temporarily unavailable, due to optimizations>,
> hfun=0x1000b4930 <cmd_error>) at eval.c:1309
> #7 0x00000001000b2d78 in top_level_1 (ignore=<value temporarily unavailable,
> due to optimizations>) at keyboard.c:1103
> #8 0x000000010011faa7 in internal_catch (tag=<value temporarily unavailable,
> due to optimizations>, func=0x1000b2d20 <top_level_1>, arg=0) at eval.c:1074
> #9 0x00000001000b1c02 in command_loop () at keyboard.c:1064
> #10 0x00000001000b1cde in recursive_edit_1 () at keyboard.c:671
> #11 0x00000001000b4bbf in Frecursive_edit () at keyboard.c:742
> #12 0x00000001000aa763 in main (argc=5, argv=0x7fff5fbff6f0) at emacs.c:1656
> 
> Unfortunately, I can't make head of tails of this, as gdb seems to be thrown
> off track as soon as I try to print anything or walk in the call stack.
> 
> However, to my untrained eye, it looks like Emacs is evaluating elisp code.
> 
> What can I do to pinpoint which elisp code this is? Can I rebuild emacs with
> other settings, making it more gdb friendly?

Are you saying that xbacktrace doesn't work at this point?