Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
What compiler did you build minidump_stackwalk with?
Original comment by thestig@chromium.org
on 19 Apr 2012 at 4:41
linux:~ # g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-suse-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --infodir=/usr/share/info
--mandir=/usr/share/man --libdir=/usr/lib64 --libexecdir=/usr/lib64
--enable-languages=c,c++,objc,fortran,obj-c++,java,ada
--enable-checking=release --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/4.3
--enable-ssp --disable-libssp --with-bugurl=http://bugs.opensuse.org/
--with-pkgversion='SUSE Linux' --disable-libgcj --disable-libmudflap
--with-slibdir=/lib64 --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
--enable-libstdcxx-allocator=new --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --program-suffix=-4.3
--enable-linux-futex --without-system-libunwind --with-cpu=generic
--build=x86_64-suse-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.4 [gcc-4_3-branch revision 152973] (SUSE Linux)
linux:~ # uname -a
Linux linux 2.6.32.12-0.7-default #1 SMP 2010-05-20 11:14:20 +0200 x86_64
x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Original comment by anne...@gmail.com
on 19 Apr 2012 at 2:11
I think this is a compiler bug in older gcc versions. I had a workaround for
this but I can't remember what it is. It's no longer an issue with gcc 4.4 and
newer. Try with an OpenSUSE 12.1 system and see how it behaves there.
Original comment by thestig@chromium.org
on 19 Apr 2012 at 6:34
I used gcc 4.4 and it runs fine thought It's not showing when it prints the
stack trace the function name and file.
Right now it's showing a.out + 0x16ef
Any suggestions on how it should look like and what to look for to get it to
show the function name instead of the memory address?
Original comment by anne...@gmail.com
on 25 Apr 2012 at 3:25
You need to pass a second argument with the base path to the symbols. Though
that is a different topic that should be discussed elsewhere, say on the
google-breakpad mailing list.
So it looks like you ran into the same compiler bug I ran into a while back. I
think one way to get around it is to build with -O0 instead of -O2.
Original comment by thestig@chromium.org
on 25 Apr 2012 at 7:01
Issue 538 has been merged into this issue.
Original comment by thestig@chromium.org
on 25 Jul 2013 at 8:17
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
anne...@gmail.com
on 13 Apr 2012 at 5:30Attachments: