15 Aug
2013
15 Aug
'13
7:07 p.m.
2013/8/16 Slávek Banko <slavek.banko(a)axis.cz>
On Friday 16 of August 2013 02:07:24 Slávek Banko
wrote:
Here is propoused patch which checks if demangle.h is present.
I consider the print_trace() and all backtrace_symbol.c as a temporary
debug crutch. Am I wrong?
Tim, what are benefits of your print_trace() comparing to e.g. kdBacktrace
or generic backtrace()?
On Friday 16 of August 2013 02:01:26 Darrell
Anderson wrote:
Good job. Just one mistake - was not included "ConfigureChecks.cmake".
Now
I created
a patch and am compiling as I write. Here is the patch.
Please review!
Slavek,
The patch did not cause any build failures. Hopefully the patch is
actually correct too.
Now to test the crash patch....
Darrell I test build on my local builder => I will
soon approve it.
Slavek
A second mistake - ${BACKTRACE_LIBRARY} should be instead of bfd, not both.
For me successfully tested builds for both variants - with and without
backtrace handler.
However, there is still good objection from Fat-Zer... It would be good to
find a consensus soon, because the current situation leads to FTBFS.
Slavek
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
trinity-devel-unsubscribe(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
For additional commands, e-mail:
trinity-devel-help(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Read list messages on the web archive:
http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/
Please remember not to top-post:
http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting