> On Jan. 1, 2016, 4:04 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > 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. > > René J.V. Bertin wrote: > I'd hope that we can avoid the compilation breakages and have no idea of > the timescale of planned obsolescence. > > I'm actually still getting pretty useful backtraces in KDE4 applications; > I'd have to see how that works out for Qt5 apps (QtCurve uses > kdelibs4support; I could use that to get kbacktraces from pretty "deep" > places ;) ). > > So how does DrKonqi/KF5 work? Doesn't it use equivalent code if not built > on kdelibs4support itself? > > David Faure wrote: > My problems where in kde4 apps. > > drkonqi attaches a debugger, it does not use a backtrace function.
Ah, hum, you're right. A debugger which doesn't always return control to drkonqi (when it's lldb), I knew that all too well ... - René J.V. ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126309/#review90392 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Dec. 10, 2015, 11:10 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, 11:10 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
