On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Eli Zaretskii <e...@gnu.org> wrote: >> Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 17:48:06 -0700 >> From: Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> >> >> It is not a fundamental bug to depend on libgcc as a shared library. >> The libgcc code is trying to do the right thing when the library is >> unloaded. I don't see any obvious bug in the code. Evidently >> something is going wrong, but the e-mail messages you linked to don't >> provide enough information to know what it is. In particular they >> don't show where in __deregister_frame_info_bases the crash is >> occurring. > > I believe that's because the versions of the library which I could > find don't have enough debug information. Does someone know where can > I find a library with debug info? Failing that, would a disassembly > near the address where it crashes be useful?
Normally the library should have debug info. I don't know why it doesn't in your case. Yes, a disassembly around the address might possibly help, although not if you are correct about where the problem is happening. > Anyway, what we see is not a crash, but a call to 'abort' from Windows > runtime. The immediate suspect for that is the line near the end of > __deregister_frame_info_bases where there's a call to gcc_assert. > Does that make sense? I don't see why that assert would trigger, no. Ian
