Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Ozkan Sezer
On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: > 2012/7/4 Ozkan Sezer : >> On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: >>> 2012/7/4 Ozkan Sezer : On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: > 2012/7/4 Tristan Gingold : >> Hi, >> >>> as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an >>> updated >>> version

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Kai Tietz
2012/7/4 Ozkan Sezer : > On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: >> 2012/7/4 Ozkan Sezer : >>> On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: 2012/7/4 Tristan Gingold : > Hi, > >> as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated >> version of your patch for setjmp.h header? > >

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Ozkan Sezer
On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: > 2012/7/4 Ozkan Sezer : >> On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: >>> 2012/7/4 Tristan Gingold : Hi, > as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated > version of your patch for setjmp.h header? Sure. I was writing a mail about

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Kai Tietz
2012/7/4 Ozkan Sezer : > On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: >> 2012/7/4 Tristan Gingold : >>> Hi, >>> as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated version of your patch for setjmp.h header? >>> >>> Sure. I was writing a mail about that, but you were faster. >>> Do

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Tristan Gingold
On Jul 4, 2012, at 3:26 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote: > On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: >> 2012/7/4 Tristan Gingold : >>> Hi, >>> as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated version of your patch for setjmp.h header? >>> >>> Sure. I was writing a mail about that, but

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Ozkan Sezer
On 7/4/12, Kai Tietz wrote: > 2012/7/4 Tristan Gingold : >> Hi, >> >>> as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated >>> version of your patch for setjmp.h header? >> >> Sure. I was writing a mail about that, but you were faster. >> >>> Do you think we should use for older

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Kai Tietz
2012/7/4 Tristan Gingold : > Hi, > >> as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated >> version of your patch for setjmp.h header? > > Sure. I was writing a mail about that, but you were faster. > >> Do you think we should use for older gcc-versions - not having the >> fixed

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Tristan Gingold
Hi, > as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated > version of your patch for setjmp.h header? Sure. I was writing a mail about that, but you were faster. > Do you think we should use for older gcc-versions - not having the > fixed frame-pointer builtin - still __mingw

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-07-04 Thread Kai Tietz
Hello Tristan, as you patch was applied to gcc's repository will you sent an updated version of your patch for setjmp.h header? Do you think we should use for older gcc-versions - not having the fixed frame-pointer builtin - still __mingw_getsp instead? Regards, Kai -

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-18 Thread Tristan Gingold
On Jun 18, 2012, at 2:31 PM, NightStrike wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote: [...] >> I think I now know how to compute the establisher frame value. This is >> simply what is advertised by Frame Reg and Frame Offset in UNWIND_INFO. The >> patch is appended belo

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-18 Thread NightStrike
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote: > > On Jun 8, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Kai Tietz wrote: > >> 2012/6/8 Tristan Gingold : >>> >>> On Jun 8, 2012, at 2:12 PM, Kai Tietz wrote: >>> Hello Tristan, Thanks for working on this. The patch is ok.  As JonY said, unified d

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-11 Thread Tristan Gingold
On Jun 8, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Kai Tietz wrote: > 2012/6/8 Tristan Gingold : >> >> On Jun 8, 2012, at 2:12 PM, Kai Tietz wrote: >> >>> Hello Tristan, >>> >>> Thanks for working on this. The patch is ok. As JonY said, unified >>> diffs are more welcome ;) >>> >>> >>> 2012/6/8 Tristan Gingold :

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-08 Thread Kai Tietz
2012/6/8 Tristan Gingold : > > On Jun 8, 2012, at 2:12 PM, Kai Tietz wrote: > >> Hello Tristan, >> >> Thanks for working on this. The patch is ok.  As JonY said, unified >> diffs are more welcome ;) >> >> >> 2012/6/8 Tristan Gingold : >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am currently working on porting our toolset to

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-08 Thread Tristan Gingold
On Jun 8, 2012, at 2:12 PM, Kai Tietz wrote: > Hello Tristan, > > Thanks for working on this. The patch is ok. As JonY said, unified > diffs are more welcome ;) > > > 2012/6/8 Tristan Gingold : >> Hi, >> >> I am currently working on porting our toolset to gcc 4.7 compiled to fully >> suppor

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-08 Thread Tristan Gingold
On Jun 8, 2012, at 1:55 PM, JonY wrote: > On 6/8/2012 18:27, Tristan Gingold wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am currently working on porting our toolset to gcc 4.7 compiled to fully >> support SEH, and I have compiled gdb. This gdb crashes frequently, and I >> traced that to the use of setjmp/longjmp.

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-08 Thread Kai Tietz
Hello Tristan, Thanks for working on this. The patch is ok. As JonY said, unified diffs are more welcome ;) 2012/6/8 Tristan Gingold : > Hi, > > I am currently working on porting our toolset to gcc 4.7 compiled to fully > support SEH, and I have compiled gdb.  This gdb crashes frequently, and

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-08 Thread JonY
On 6/8/2012 18:27, Tristan Gingold wrote: > Hi, > > I am currently working on porting our toolset to gcc 4.7 compiled to fully > support SEH, and I have compiled gdb. This gdb crashes frequently, and I > traced that to the use of setjmp/longjmp. > > When compiled with SEH enabled, mingw64 make

[Mingw-w64-public] Bug in setjmp.h on win64 + SEH

2012-06-08 Thread Tristan Gingold
Hi, I am currently working on porting our toolset to gcc 4.7 compiled to fully support SEH, and I have compiled gdb. This gdb crashes frequently, and I traced that to the use of setjmp/longjmp. When compiled with SEH enabled, mingw64 makes longjmp use RtlUnwinEx, and to achieve that it calls