----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126309/#review90392 -----------------------------------------------------------
This is kdelibs4support, this code is doomed to disappear and apps are using kDebug less and less. Is it worth risking compilation breakages on some systems? Also I found kBacktrace less and less useful over the years because with hidden visibility I get a lot of "???" for non-exported methods. gdb works much better. - David Faure On Dec. 10, 2015, 10:10 p.m., René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126309/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 10, 2015, 10:10 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Software on Mac OS X and KDE Frameworks. > > > Repository: kdelibs4support > > > Description > ------- > > This is a "backport" of the patches to `kdebug.cpp` that enable backtrace and > demangling support on OS X, FreeBSD and Solaris/OpenIndiana. > The KDE4 version was discussed here: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121213/ > > It seems that change was never incorporated because of a single open issue > for which I never found the time (also given that it seemed a bit overkill). > > My PC-BSD and Indiana VMs are no longer operational; it seems highly likely > that the current code still works but if further testing or polishing is > required I'll rather remove the specific parts than bring the VMs online > again. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/kdecore/kdebug.cpp 6f04dce > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126309/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > On Kubuntu 14.04 with various gcc versions and clang; OS X 10.6 - 10.9 with > gcc and clang, PC-BSD with clang and on Open Indiana. > > The KDE4 RR raises some doubts concerning checking for only an OS and not > compilers (in demangling). I think there is no reason for such doubts: > compilers are obliged to co-exist and be compatible nowadays, at least on > individual OS families (each platform will have its own default/dominant > compiler that is used to build the system libraries). In practice it turns > out that gcc and clang use the same C++ mangling scheme. The only difference > is in the way `backtrace_symbols()` formats the stack, and that indeed > appears to defined the OS rather than by the compiler used. > (Then again I'm willing to stand corrected by someone who has a Linux system > built from scratch with clang and libc++, or possibly a Gnu/BSD set-up :)) > > > Thanks, > > René J.V. Bertin > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
