Your message dated Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:04:57 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line status of #224200 ?
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 17 Dec 2003 00:59:08 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 16 18:59:08 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from palrel11.hp.com [156.153.255.246]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AWLub-0001Tj-00; Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:35:21 -0600
Received: from hplms2.hpl.hp.com (hplms2.hpl.hp.com [15.0.152.33])
by palrel11.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 855BF1C0160B
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:35:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali.hpl.hp.com [15.4.89.123])
by hplms2.hpl.hp.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/HPL-PA Hub) with ESMTP id
hBGKZJrN012659;
Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:35:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali [127.0.0.1])
by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-5) with ESMTP id
hBGKZJVR003459;
Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:35:19 -0800
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-5) id hBGKZJWO003457;
Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:35:19 -0800
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: David Mosberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: gcc-3.3 fails to generate EH_FRAME program-header
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:35:19 -0800
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin
2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2003_12_15
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on master.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no
version=2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2003_12_15
X-Spam-Level:
Package: gcc-3.3
Version: 1:3.3.3-0pre0
Severity: important
Tags: sid
It appears that the behavior of Debian gcc-3.3 is inconsistent with
that of Red Hat's gcc-3.2 when -fexceptions is specified. Example:
On Debian/testing:
$ cat t.c
int main (int argc, char **argv) {
printf ("hello\n");
}
$ gcc-3.3 -fexceptions t.c
$ objdump --priv a.out |grep EH
(no output)
On Red Hat 9:
$ cat t.c
int main (int argc, char **argv) {
printf ("hello\n");
}
$ gcc -fexceptions t.c
$ objdump --priv a.out |grep EH
EH_FRAME off 0x00000420 vaddr 0x08048420 paddr 0x08048420 align 2**2
I believe this is a serious problem because it means that a DWARF2
unwinder will not be able to unwind across C code even though it was
compiled with -fexceptions.
--david
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux napali 2.4.17-686 #2 Sat Dec 22 21:58:49 EST 2001 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages gcc-3.3 depends on:
ii binutils 2.14.90.0.7-3 The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii cpp-3.3 1:3.3.3-0pre0 The GNU C preprocessor
ii gcc-3.3-base 1:3.3.3-0pre0 The GNU Compiler Collection (base
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-10 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libgcc1 1:3.3.3-0pre0 GCC support library
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 224200-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Jan 2004 00:31:33 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 12 18:30:28 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1Ag9Is-0002yQ-00; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:08:54 -0600
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.19.1])
by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA00944;
Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:04:58 +0100 (MET)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8/Submit) id i0CL4vmL014906;
Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:04:57 +0100 (MET)
From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:04:57 +0100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: status of #224200 ?
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) "Common Lisp" XEmacs Lucid
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin
2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2004_1_5
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on master.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=4.0 tests=none autolearn=no
version=2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2004_1_5
X-Spam-Level:
David Mosberger writes:
> >>>>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:41:53 +0100, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>> said:
>
> Matthias> David, can we close this one? If you think it's a bug,
> Matthias> please could you forward this upstream yourself and tell
> Matthias> me the upstream PR number?
>
> I haven't had a chance to investigate, but I take your word for it
> that the CVS tree shows the same behavior, so I think it's OK to close
> the bug report.
ok, closing the report.
