Review Request 126309: backtrace and demangle for OS X, FreeBSD and Solaris/OpenIndiana
René J.V. Bertin
rjvbertin at gmail.com
Fri Jan 1 17:58:01 UTC 2016
> On Jan. 1, 2016, 4:04 p.m., David Faure wrote:
> > This is kdelibs4support, this code is doomed to disappear and apps are using kDebug less and less. Is it worth risking compilation breakages on some systems?
> >
> > Also I found kBacktrace less and less useful over the years because with hidden visibility I get a lot of "???" for non-exported methods. gdb works much better.
>
> René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> I'd hope that we can avoid the compilation breakages and have no idea of the timescale of planned obsolescence.
>
> I'm actually still getting pretty useful backtraces in KDE4 applications; I'd have to see how that works out for Qt5 apps (QtCurve uses kdelibs4support; I could use that to get kbacktraces from pretty "deep" places ;) ).
>
> So how does DrKonqi/KF5 work? Doesn't it use equivalent code if not built on kdelibs4support itself?
>
> David Faure wrote:
> My problems where in kde4 apps.
>
> drkonqi attaches a debugger, it does not use a backtrace function.
Ah, hum, you're right. A debugger which doesn't always return control to drkonqi (when it's lldb), I knew that all too well ...
- René J.V.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126309/#review90392
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Dec. 10, 2015, 11:10 p.m., René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126309/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Dec. 10, 2015, 11:10 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for KDE Software on Mac OS X and KDE Frameworks.
>
>
> Repository: kdelibs4support
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> This is a "backport" of the patches to `kdebug.cpp` that enable backtrace and demangling support on OS X, FreeBSD and Solaris/OpenIndiana.
> The KDE4 version was discussed here: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121213/
>
> It seems that change was never incorporated because of a single open issue for which I never found the time (also given that it seemed a bit overkill).
>
> My PC-BSD and Indiana VMs are no longer operational; it seems highly likely that the current code still works but if further testing or polishing is required I'll rather remove the specific parts than bring the VMs online again.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> src/kdecore/kdebug.cpp 6f04dce
>
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126309/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> On Kubuntu 14.04 with various gcc versions and clang; OS X 10.6 - 10.9 with gcc and clang, PC-BSD with clang and on Open Indiana.
>
> The KDE4 RR raises some doubts concerning checking for only an OS and not compilers (in demangling). I think there is no reason for such doubts: compilers are obliged to co-exist and be compatible nowadays, at least on individual OS families (each platform will have its own default/dominant compiler that is used to build the system libraries). In practice it turns out that gcc and clang use the same C++ mangling scheme. The only difference is in the way `backtrace_symbols()` formats the stack, and that indeed appears to defined the OS rather than by the compiler used.
> (Then again I'm willing to stand corrected by someone who has a Linux system built from scratch with clang and libc++, or possibly a Gnu/BSD set-up :))
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> René J.V. Bertin
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20160101/7bee14a8/attachment.html>
More information about the Kde-frameworks-devel
mailing list