Hi!
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:58:04 -0800, Caroline Tice wrote:
> Since all the pieces of this patch have been approved, I will commit
> it later today (since Patrick does not have commit privileges).
(This happened in r220232 and r220254.)
I'm seeing:
[...]
checking dynamic linker charac
Hi,
after the missed bug at Linux with no VTV I checked everything again on
the trunk. I saw that I erroneously wrote in the changelog for
libvtv/aclocal.m4 regenerate and deleted the change from the patch. The
only change I made there in my working directory was the following.
Index: libvtv/aclo
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:28:17AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> --- acinclude.m4(revision 220257)
>> >> +++ acinclude.m4(working copy)
>> >> @@ -2320,8 +2320,6 @@
>> >>AC_MSG_CHECKING([for vtable verify support])
>> >>
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:28:17AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> --- acinclude.m4(revision 220257)
> >> +++ acinclude.m4(working copy)
> >> @@ -2320,8 +2320,6 @@
> >>AC_MSG_CHECKING([for vtable verify support])
> >>AC_MSG_RESULT([$enable_vtable_verify])
> >>
> >> - AM_CONDITIO
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 07:16:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 01/29/2015 07:12 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> >> that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
>> >>
>> >> 2015-01-29
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 07:16:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 01/29/2015 07:12 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
> >>
> >> 2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
> >>
> >> * acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENA
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:12:38AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
> >
> > 2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
> >
> > * acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VTABLE_VERIFY): Define VTV_CYGMIN
> > uncon
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:16 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:13 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> On 29/01/15 19:05 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
2015-01-29 Matthias
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:13 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 29/01/15 19:05 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>>
>>> that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
>>>
>>> 2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
>>>
>>>* acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VTAB
On 01/29/2015 07:12 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
>>
>> 2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
>>
>> * acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VTABLE_VERIFY): Define VTV_CYGMIN
>> unconditionally.
>> *
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 29/01/15 19:05 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>> that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
>>
>> 2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
>>
>>* acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VTABLE_VERIFY): Define VTV_CYGMIN
>>unconditionally.
>>
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
>
> 2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
>
> * acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VTABLE_VERIFY): Define VTV_CYGMIN
> unconditionally.
> * configure: Regenerate.
>
This is wrong. You
On 29/01/15 19:05 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
* acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VTABLE_VERIFY): Define VTV_CYGMIN
unconditionally.
* configure: Regenerate.
OK, thanks.
that fixes the build failure. ok to commit?
2015-01-29 Matthias Klose
* acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VTABLE_VERIFY): Define VTV_CYGMIN
unconditionally.
* configure: Regenerate.
On 01/29/2015 06:52 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> r220254 broke bootstrap on the trunk:
>
> c
I (sadly) committed this patch in two pieces, one last night and one
this morning. In the commit last night, I had forgotten to commit the
Makefile.in and configure files that got generated by autoconf and
automake. Did you sync your sources before or after the second
commit?
-- Caroline Tice
O
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 9:48 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Caroline Tice wrote:
>> Since all the pieces of this patch have been approved, I will commit
>> it later today (since Patrick does not have commit privileges).
>
> I got
>
> configure: error: conditional "VTV_CYGMI
r220254 broke bootstrap on the trunk:
configure: error: conditional "VTV_CYGMIN" was never defined.
Usually this means the macro was only invoked conditionally.
Makefile:12932: recipe for target 'configure-stage1-target-libstdc++-v3' failed
make[4]: *** [configure-stage1-target-libstdc++-v3] Error
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Caroline Tice wrote:
> Since all the pieces of this patch have been approved, I will commit
> it later today (since Patrick does not have commit privileges).
I got
configure: error: conditional "VTV_CYGMIN" was never defined.
Usually this means the macro was only
Since all the pieces of this patch have been approved, I will commit
it later today (since Patrick does not have commit privileges).
-- Caroline Tice
cmt...@google.com
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:31 AM, Patrick Wollgast
wrote:
> Ping.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg01270.html
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg01270.html
On 15.01.2015 22:50, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
> On 15.01.2015 17:01, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Patrick Wollgast
>> wrote:
>>> Is there something I'm still supposed to do, since I don't have write
>>>
On 15.01.2015 17:01, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Patrick Wollgast
> wrote:
>> Is there something I'm still supposed to do, since I don't have write
>> access and this was the last part missing an "OK"?
>
> Somebody with write access will need to commit the patch fo
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Patrick Wollgast
wrote:
> Is there something I'm still supposed to do, since I don't have write
> access and this was the last part missing an "OK"?
Somebody with write access will need to commit the patch for you. You
should send a new clean patch including all
On 15.01.2015 00:52, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Patrick Wollgast
> wrote:
>> On 14.01.2015 20:00, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Patrick Wollgast
>>> wrote:
A short recap again:
Latest patch, changelog and a test progra
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Patrick Wollgast
wrote:
> On 14.01.2015 20:00, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Patrick Wollgast
>> wrote:
>>> A short recap again:
>>>
>>> Latest patch, changelog and a test program (further information about
>>> the program in the mai
On 14.01.2015 20:00, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Patrick Wollgast
> wrote:
>> A short recap again:
>>
>> Latest patch, changelog and a test program (further information about
>> the program in the mail):
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg03368.html
>
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Patrick Wollgast
wrote:
> A short recap again:
>
> Latest patch, changelog and a test program (further information about
> the program in the mail):
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg03368.html
In that patch, the change to varasm.c looks wrong if nei
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Patrick Wollgast
wrote:
> A short recap again:
>
> Latest patch, changelog and a test program (further information about
> the program in the mail):
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg03368.html
>
>
> Approved:
> * gcc/config/i386/*
> * libgcc/*
> * li
A short recap again:
Latest patch, changelog and a test program (further information about
the program in the mail):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg03368.html
Approved:
* gcc/config/i386/*
* libgcc/*
* libstdc++-v3/*
* libvtv/* (Some changes made to three of these fil
On 10.12.2014 17:37, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
> Ping.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg03368.html
>
> On 27.11.2014 10:42, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
>> On 12.11.2014 19:40, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> TerminateProcess is actually bad, as it doesn't call any of the atexit
>>> handlers. You
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg03368.html
On 27.11.2014 10:42, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
> On 12.11.2014 19:40, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> TerminateProcess is actually bad, as it doesn't call any of the atexit
>> handlers. You simply nuke the process off. For cygwin this behavior
>>
On 12.11.2014 19:40, Kai Tietz wrote:
> TerminateProcess is actually bad, as it doesn't call any of the atexit
> handlers. You simply nuke the process off. For cygwin this behavior
> is inacceptable. Why a classical abort, or a classical exit call
> cause for you that issues? It seems to me mor
2014-11-12 18:45 GMT+01:00 Patrick Wollgast :
>>
>> I don't think you have addressed all of the comments I made in the
>> comment, do you?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kai
>>
>
> I added the three checks, if TARGET_PECOFF is defined, and fixed the
> whitespace issues.
>
> For the questions regarding C-runtime
>
> I don't think you have addressed all of the comments I made in the
> comment, do you?
>
> Regards,
> Kai
>
I added the three checks, if TARGET_PECOFF is defined, and fixed the
whitespace issues.
For the questions regarding C-runtime/Win32 functions I haven't changed
anything in the patch b
014-11-12 17:22 GMT+01:00 Patrick Wollgast :
> Ping for the question below.
>
> On 30.10.2014 15:29, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
>> Since I haven't heard back for quite a while, I wanted to ask what the
>> current stat of the patch is.
>>
>> Is the patch from the last mail approved (
>> https://gcc.gnu
Ping for the question below.
On 30.10.2014 15:29, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
> Since I haven't heard back for quite a while, I wanted to ask what the
> current stat of the patch is.
>
> Is the patch from the last mail approved (
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01524.html ), or should
Since I haven't heard back for quite a while, I wanted to ask what the
current stat of the patch is.
Is the patch from the last mail approved (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01524.html ), or should
the matters discussed further?
regards,
Patrick
On 09.10.2014 16:42, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Not approved:
>> * gcc/cp/vtable-class-hierarchy.c
>
> Index: gcc/cp/vtable-class-hierarchy.c
> ===
> --- gcc/cp/vtable-class-hierarchy.c(Revision 214408)
> +++ gcc/cp/vtable-class-hierarch
2014-10-09 15:52 GMT+02:00 Patrick Wollgast :
> On 27.09.2014 12:50, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Hi Patrick,
>>
>> the mingw/cygwin part your patch looks fine to me. Nevertheless I
>> have one question regarding to you. Do you have FSF papers for gcc
>> already? As I asked an overseer and he didn't foun
On 27.09.2014 12:50, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> the mingw/cygwin part your patch looks fine to me. Nevertheless I
> have one question regarding to you. Do you have FSF papers for gcc
> already? As I asked an overseer and he didn't found you on the list.
>
> Regards,
> Kai
>
The paper
Hi Patrick,
the mingw/cygwin part your patch looks fine to me. Nevertheless I
have one question regarding to you. Do you have FSF papers for gcc
already? As I asked an overseer and he didn't found you on the list.
Regards,
Kai
On 23.09.2014 12:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 19/09/14 00:23 +0200, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
>> Index: libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4
>> ===
>> --- libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4(Revision 214408)
>> +++ libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4(Arbeit
On 19/09/14 00:23 +0200, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
Index: libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4
===
--- libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4 (Revision 214408)
+++ libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4 (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -2321,7 +2321,17 @@ AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_VT
Ok, your patch looks OK to me, but I can only approve the libvtv file
changes. The changes in the other files also seem ok to me, but
someone else will have to approve the modifications in them:
gcc/config/i386/cygwin.h
gcc/config/i386/mingw-w64.h
gcc/config/i386/mingw32.h
gcc/cp/vtable-class-hie
Added Benjamin De Kosnik as a c++ runtime libs maintainer and Kai Tietz
as Windows/Cygwin/MinGW maintainer.
>> In changes to gcc/config/i386/cygwin.h mingw-w64.h and mingw32.h, you
>> forgot to handle the "fvtable-verify=preinit" options.
>> fvtable-veriy=preinit should cause vtv_start_preinit
First attempt to send this failed.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Caroline Tice wrote:
>
> Hi Patrick,
>
> Mostly your patch looks OK to me, though there are a couple of serious issues
> (mentioned below). Most of my comments are for formatting stuff. Once you
> have fixed these issues, le
Ping for https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-08/msg02559.html
Also added Caroline Tice, as libvtv maintainer, to cc and attached
virtual_func_test_min_UAF.cpp, which I forgot in the original mail.
Patrick
On 28.08.2014 13:03, Patrick Wollgast wrote:
> This patch contains a port of VTV -fvtab
This patch contains a port of VTV -fvtable-verify=std for Cygwin and MinGW.
Since weak symbols on Windows and Linux are implemented differently, and
VTV should have the possibility to be switched on and off, the structure
of the feature had to be modified.
On Linux libstdc++ contains the weak stub
47 matches
Mail list logo
