https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78531
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> hmm, that doesn't look better:
>
> Breakpoint 1, __GI___fortify_fail (msg=msg@entry=0x7ffff69f487d "buffer
> overflow detected")
> at fortify_fail.c:28
> 28 fortify_fail.c: No such file or directory.
> (gdb) bt
> #0 __GI___fortify_fail (msg=msg@entry=0x7ffff69f487d "buffer overflow
> detected") at fortify_fail.c:28
> #1 0x00007ffff6980240 in __GI___chk_fail () at chk_fail.c:28
> #2 0x00000000006f7716 in build_raise_check(int, exception_info_kind) ()
> #3 0x0000000000706119 in gigi ()
> #4 0x00000000009e8c90 in back_end.call_back_end ()
> #5 0x00000000009e9af7 in gnat1drv ()
> #6 0x00000000006c89ed in gnat_parse_file() ()
> #7 0x0000000000d791cf in compile_file() ()
> #8 0x00000000006acc7f in toplev::main(int, char**) ()
> #9 0x00000000006aeff7 in main ()
A little better though, thanks. I guess it's this declaration in namet.h:
/* The global name buffer. */
struct Bounded_String
{
Nat Max_Length;
Nat Length;
char Chars[1];
/* The 1 here is wrong, but it doesn't matter, because all the code either
goes by Length, or NUL-terminates the string before processing it. */
};
I thought this was a well-known allocation idiom in C++ because you don't have
flexible array members, do you? That being said, I can put the real value.
