> -----Original Message----- > From: Carmelo AMOROSO [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 12:18 AM > To: Thomas De Schampheleire > Cc: ANDY KENNEDY; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Backtrace in uClibC > > On 3/31/2011 11:56 AM, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:03 AM, ANDY KENNEDY > <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> So, initially it looks like this would (at least) work for > mips32r2 > >>>> > >>> > >>> Fine, please let us to know your outcomes. > >> > >> > >> Doh! Stupid question: How would I test that this _actually_ > works? > >> > >> I mean, I tried this: > >> > >> > >> #include <stdio.h> > >> #include <stdlib.h> > >> #include <signal.h> > >> #include <execinfo.h> > >> > >> void *barray[128]; > >> > >> static void segfault(int sgn) { > >> size_t size = backtrace(barray, sizeof(barray)); > >> fprintf(stderr, "Backtrace: \n"); > >> backtrace_symbols_fd(barray, size, 2); > >> abort(); > >> } > >> > >> int f1(int *ptr) > >> { > >> printf("Pointer = %i\n", *ptr); > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> int f2(int *ptr) > >> { > >> f1((int *)(ptr + 0x5555aaaa)); > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> int main(void) > >> { > >> signal(11, segfault); > >> f2((int *)109324); > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> but I only got this: > >> > >> Backtrace: > >> Aborted > >> > >> > >> When I compile I have to specify -lubacktrace; however, when > linking > >> against > >> glibc, the backtrace family is apparently included by default. > >> > >> FYI: I get no linker errors, and no warnings. > >> > >> Please advise. > >> > >> Andy > > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Did you make any progress with backtrace in uClibc since this > thread? > > > > Thanks, > > Thomas > > > > Hello, > I'm finally back to work on uClibc. I'm preparing some patches to > make > backtrace available for all archs, asking you guys to test on your > platforms. > > Thanks, > Carmelo
I'm Game. Just CC me so you show up in my inbox ;). Does this also include you working with librt or that one header file you were talking about (months ago)? I'm game for testing just about anything you throw at me. I'd MUCH rather be using uClibC than eglibc for size and speed reasons (I find that uClibC is about 30% faster most of the time). Andy _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
