[Bug binutils/31327] libbacktrace test failures
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Sam James --- commit b450e102730c527ec3b7164b119362a15ce545e6 (upstream/master) Author: Sam James Date: Mon Mar 11 17:21:07 2024 + Sync libbacktrace from gcc [PR31327] Note that this includes Nick's fix from edf64cd235f5ecb3725e7cf1ff83bbdb6dd53340 which landed upstream a bit differently as r13-1566-g9ed57796235abc in GCC. This pulls in libbacktrace as of r14-9404-gc775a030af9cad in GCC trunk. Note that I have dropped a top-level Darwin change from r14-4825-g6a6d3817afa02b which would've required an autoreconf, as it should be handled separately. Approved-By: Tom Tromey -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/31327] libbacktrace test failures
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327 --- Comment #5 from Sam James --- Thank you both. Done at https://inbox.sourceware.org/gdb/87plw4r5ta@gentoo.org/T/#u. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/31327] libbacktrace test failures
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327 --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #2) > OK, I get what's happening here. > > This ended up being > https://github.com/ianlancetaylor/libbacktrace/issues/118 which is fixed > upstream. > > Nick, or Ian, could we sync the version in binutils-gdb.git with upstream > please? I am happy to do it with permission too. I can. But I would rather one of the GDB global maintainers did it, since gdb is the consumer of libbacktrace. If you do not get a response from them however please ping me and I will take care of it. (In reply to Ian Taylor from comment #3) > I don't know if there is any binutils policy about this. I think that we should consider libbacktrace to be the same as libiberty or config. Ie something that we sync from gcc. In fact we should probably add that to the top-level MAINTAINERS file... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/31327] libbacktrace test failures
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327 --- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor --- It's fine with me. I don't know if there is any binutils policy about this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/31327] libbacktrace test failures
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC||ian at airs dot com, ||nickc at redhat dot com See Also||https://github.com/ianlance ||taylor/libbacktrace/issues/ ||118 Resolution|WORKSFORME |--- --- Comment #2 from Sam James --- OK, I get what's happening here. This ended up being https://github.com/ianlancetaylor/libbacktrace/issues/118 which is fixed upstream. Nick, or Ian, could we sync the version in binutils-gdb.git with upstream please? I am happy to do it with permission too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/31327] libbacktrace test failures
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Sam James --- If I blindly copy in libbacktrace, it doesn't help, so let me investigate a bit more then report it to GCC if it continues. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
