digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 6353] New: No stacktraces on x86_64
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (42/42) Jul 20 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (8/8) Aug 11 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (12/12) Aug 12 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (10/10) Aug 12 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (11/11) Jan 20 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353 Summary: No stacktraces on x86_64 Product: D Version: unspecified Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: druntime AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com ReportedBy: jmdavisProg gmx.com --- Comment #0 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> 2011-07-20 00:46:20 PDT --- This program void main() { assert(0); } prints this on x86_64: core.exception.AssertError w(3): Assertion failure ---------------- ---------------- _All_ stack traces look like that on x86_64. For this one, if I were to compile with -m32, I'd get this: core.exception.AssertError w(3): Assertion failure ---------------- ./w(onAssertError+0x2e) [0x806111e] ./w(_d_assertm+0x16) [0x805f096] ./w() [0x805ca76] ./w(_Dmain+0xd) [0x805ca61] ./w(_D2rt6dmain24mainUiPPaZi7runMainMFZv+0x1a) [0x805f53e] ./w(_D2rt6dmain24mainUiPPaZi7tryExecMFMDFZvZv+0x20) [0x805f1d8] ./w(_D2rt6dmain24mainUiPPaZi6runAllMFZv+0x32) [0x805f582] ./w(_D2rt6dmain24mainUiPPaZi7tryExecMFMDFZvZv+0x20) [0x805f1d8] ./w(main+0x94) [0x805f184] /usr/lib32/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf3) [0xf75aa233] ---------------- So, this is purely a 64-bit issue. But the lack of stacktraces on x86_64 is a definite impedement to debugging, and it really needs to get fixed. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 20 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353 Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |regression -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Aug 11 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353 Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |braddr puremagic.com Severity|regression |critical --- Comment #1 from Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> 2011-08-12 02:18:48 PDT --- Something that's never worked isn't a regression. I agree it's a major feature gap for x86-64 though. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Aug 12 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> 2011-08-12 02:26:30 PDT --- I'm pretty darn sure that this was working before - hence why I changed it to regression. I'd have to go try older versions of dmd to be 100% sure though. But I have no problem with it being labeled critical instead of regression even if it is a regression. It's making my life _much_ harder when it comes to debugging. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Aug 12 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6353 Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> 2012-01-20 23:23:07 PST --- This works now and has for a couple of releases, I believe. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 20 2012