[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2012-12-20 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36044 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resol

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2012-12-20 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36044 --- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-20 18:15:19 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Thu Dec 20 18:15:13 2012 New Revision: 194648 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194648 Log: 2012-12-20 Janus Weil

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2012-12-19 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36044 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2012-03-02 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36044 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch URL|

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2009-02-22 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-23 04:37 --- If anyone is looking into this, please let me know if there are any specific posix calls needed that I should put into the gfc_posix module. ( Priority wise.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2009-02-22 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-22 22:33 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Try abort(). (Though I do not recall whether it works, I think it does.) Does not work. abort() raises a SIGABRT, and we only catch SIGSEGV, SIGBUS, SIGILL and SIGFPE. >> Anyway I'm lo

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2008-04-28 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-28 21:36 --- Confirmed, this would indeed be useful. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2008-04-28 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-28 16:41 --- > > I think compiling with -fbacktrace and calling the STOP intrinsic should > > emit a backtrace. I think it should not. For abort(), I think a backtrace is ok, but for STOP there should be no backtrace. Using stop

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2008-04-28 Thread jaydub66 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from jaydub66 at gmail dot com 2008-04-28 15:44 --- (In reply to comment #1) > I think compiling with -fbacktrace and calling the STOP intrinsic should emit > a > backtrace. I don't think it does. Anyway I'm looking for a solution that keeps the program running after th

[Bug libfortran/36044] user-requested backtrace

2008-04-27 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-27 18:43 --- I think compiling with -fbacktrace and calling the STOP intrinsic should emit a backtrace. Maybe not enough, but still useful. -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed