From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] gcc: remove option on SJLJ exceptions
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:38:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100729133837.5680e0c2@surf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201007290538.09064.minimod@morethan.org>
Hello,
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:38:06 -0500
"Michael S. Zick" <minimod@morethan.org> wrote:
> And of course you confirmed that the Lua package's
> error handling still works properly, complete with
> same backtrace that is produced when SJLJ exceptions are enabled.
No, I did not.
> You did make that test didn't you?
Why do you need to be so aggressive ? It is possible that removing this
option was a mistake, but there's *really* no need to be so
aggressive. It only reduces the motivation to look at the problem...
So, trying to be constructive, how can I test that Lua still produces
correct backtraces ? (I'm not a Lua programmer at all).
Thanks,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-29 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-29 6:30 [Buildroot] [pull request] Pull request for branch gcc-remove-options Thomas Petazzoni
2010-07-29 6:30 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] gcc: remove option on SJLJ exceptions Thomas Petazzoni
2010-07-29 10:38 ` Michael S. Zick
2010-07-29 11:38 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2010-07-29 11:59 ` Michael S. Zick
2010-07-29 12:18 ` Michael S. Zick
2010-07-29 14:30 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2010-07-29 15:09 ` Michael S. Zick
2010-07-29 15:11 ` Michael S. Zick
2010-07-29 12:30 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2010-07-29 12:34 ` Peter Korsgaard
2010-07-29 12:47 ` Michael S. Zick
2010-07-29 13:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2010-07-29 6:30 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] toolchain: remove multilib Thomas Petazzoni
2010-07-29 6:53 ` [Buildroot] [pull request] Pull request for branch gcc-remove-options Peter Korsgaard
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-07-28 10:10 Thomas Petazzoni
2010-07-28 10:10 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] gcc: remove option on SJLJ exceptions Thomas Petazzoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100729133837.5680e0c2@surf \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.