This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/50678] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: c52104y on x86_64-apple-darwin10
- From: "ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:04:38 +0000
- Subject: [Bug target/50678] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: c52104y on x86_64-apple-darwin10
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-50678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50678
--- Comment #51 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-18 20:04:38 UTC ---
> 2. if the vendor decides to 'fix' libunwind .. we won't detect this ...
> (although I still think this idea is worth pursuing, on the grounds that 'no
> fix' or a fix to Libc are more likely).
They cannot change libunwind as this will break binary compatibility for all
the programs using it. In contrast, 99.99% of the programs don't care about
the unwind info of _sigtramp (otherwise the bug wouldn't have survived long).
> 3. _Unwind_Find_FDE is returning NULL in the following proof-of-concept hack..
IIRC this can happen if the frame uses "compact unwind info", but I don't know
what this means.
We could probably get away by using the core routines of libunwind, but I
wonder if this is really worth the hassle. Let's wait a little and see what
kind of reply we get from the Apple side.