Bug#387875: Patch for ARM gcj
I've attached a potential fix for this bug. Riku Voipio tested it for
me and says that the testsuite looks much better now; he said that
gjdoc was run during the binary-all build and tried to use the system's
broken gij, but otherwise things look OK. I would recommend we include
this patch. I'm not sure there's any point submitting it upstream
until the ARM libffi bits go; not sure what status on that is.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
diff -Nur debian.orig/patches/libjava-sjlj.dpatch
debian/patches/libjava-sjlj.dpatch
--- debian.orig/patches/libjava-sjlj.dpatch 1969-12-31 19:00:00.0
-0500
+++ debian/patches/libjava-sjlj.dpatch 2006-11-06 14:28:49.0 -0500
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+#! /bin/sh -e
+
+# DP: Don't try to use _Unwind_Backtrace on SJLJ targets.
+# DP: See bug #387875, #388505, GCC PR 29206.
+
+dir=
+if [ $# -eq 3 -a "$2" = '-d' ]; then
+pdir="-d $3"
+dir="$3/"
+elif [ $# -ne 1 ]; then
+echo >&2 "`basename $0`: script expects -patch|-unpatch as argument"
+exit 1
+fi
+case "$1" in
+-patch)
+patch $pdir -f --no-backup-if-mismatch -p1 < $0
+#cd ${dir}gcc && autoconf
+;;
+-unpatch)
+patch $pdir -f --no-backup-if-mismatch -R -p1 < $0
+#rm ${dir}gcc/configure
+;;
+*)
+echo >&2 "`basename $0`: script expects -patch|-unpatch as argument"
+exit 1
+esac
+exit 0
+
+---
+ libjava/sysdep/generic/backtrace.h | 17 +
+ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
+
+Index: src/libjava/sysdep/generic/backtrace.h
+===
+--- src.orig/libjava/sysdep/generic/backtrace.h2006-11-06
14:00:32.0 -0500
src/libjava/sysdep/generic/backtrace.h 2006-11-06 14:04:38.0
-0500
+@@ -13,6 +13,20 @@ details. */
+
+ #include
+
++#ifdef SJLJ_EXCEPTIONS
++
++#undef _Unwind_GetIPInfo
++#define _Unwind_GetIPInfo(ctx,ip_before_insn) \
++ (abort (), (void) (ctx), *ip_before_insn = 1, 0)
++
++#undef _Unwind_GetRegionStart
++#define _Unwind_GetRegionStart(ctx) \
++ (abort (), (void) (ctx), 0)
++
++#undef _Unwind_Backtrace
++#define _Unwind_Backtrace(trace_fn,state_ptr) \
++ (fallback_backtrace (trace_fn, state_ptr))
++
+ /* Unwind through the call stack calling TRACE_FN with STATE for every stack
+frame. Returns the reason why the unwinding was stopped. */
+ _Unwind_Reason_Code
+@@ -20,4 +34,7 @@ fallback_backtrace (_Unwind_Trace_Fn, _J
+ {
+ return _URC_NO_REASON;
+ }
++
++#endif /* SJLJ_EXCEPTIONS */
++
+ #endif
diff -Nur debian.orig/rules.patch debian/rules.patch
--- debian.orig/rules.patch 2006-11-06 10:05:14.0 -0500
+++ debian/rules.patch 2006-11-06 14:29:57.0 -0500
@@ -76,6 +76,7 @@
pr26208-r111674 \
pr11953 \
pr29362 \
+ libjava-sjlj \
# svn-updates \
Processed: cloning 397606, retitle -1 to 0.99999 printed as 0. instead of 1. by format(f3.0) ... ...
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21 > clone 397606 -1 Bug#397606: scilab: 1-1E-16 displayed as 0. Bug 397606 cloned as bug 397671. > retitle -1 0.9 printed as 0. instead of 1. by format(f3.0) Bug#397671: scilab: 1-1E-16 displayed as 0. Changed Bug title. (By the way, that Bug is currently marked as done.) > reassign -1 gfortran-4.1 Bug#397671: 0.9 printed as 0. instead of 1. by format(f3.0) Bug reassigned from package `scilab' to `gfortran-4.1'. > forwarded -1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28354 Bug#397671: 0.9 printed as 0. instead of 1. by format(f3.0) Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28354. (By the way, this Bug is currently marked as done.) > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: reopening 397671
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21 > reopen 397671 Bug#397671: 0.9 printed as 0. instead of 1. by format(f3.0) Bug reopened, originator not changed. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gcc-4.1 4.1.1ds2-19 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the gcc-4.1 source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 4.1.1ds1-13 Current version: 4.1.1ds2-19 -- This email is automatically generated; [EMAIL PROTECTED] is responsible. See http://people.debian.org/~henning/trille/ for more information. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Bug c++/20133] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] internal compiler error: in import_export_decl, at cp/decl2.c:1726
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-08 23:47 --- *** Bug 29766 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ypwangandy at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20133 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Bug c++/29766] Template Specialization break down
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-08 23:47 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20133 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29766 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#388505: Patch for ARM gcj
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:51:25AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > I've attached a potential fix for this bug. Riku Voipio tested it for > me and says that the testsuite looks much better now; he said that > gjdoc was run during the binary-all build and tried to use the system's > broken gij, but otherwise things look OK. I would recommend we include > this patch. I'm not sure there's any point submitting it upstream > until the ARM libffi bits go; not sure what status on that is. Beautiful! I'll happily grant a freeze exception for this fix, FWIW. :) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
