Eric Blake byu.net> writes:
> When using both stackoverflow_install_handler and segv_handler_missing, a
> SIGSEGV from dereferencing NULL will be wrongly treated as a stack
> overflow on platforms that use mincore to check if the fault is near the
> stack. In stackvma-mincore.c, mincore_is_near_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Eric Blake on 7/16/2008 9:11 PM:
| According to Bruno Haible on 7/16/2008 7:29 PM:
| | If you want to save linking with libsigsegv, just do the test
| | '#if HAVE_LIBSIGSEGV && ! HAVE_XSI_STACK_OVERFLOW_HEURISTIC' at configure
| | time ra
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In porting c-stack to use libsigsegv, I discovered a bug in libsigsegv 2.5
on OpenBSD 4.0.
When using both stackoverflow_install_handler and segv_handler_missing, a
SIGSEGV from dereferencing NULL will be wrongly treated as a stack
overflow on platfo
Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, on 16 Jul 2008:
>
> Any response as to whether the standard intended to codify the behavior of
> Solaris in allowing portable detection of stack overflow, and thus whether
> Linux' behavior is buggy for populating uc_stack with the alternate stack
> details rat
