From owner-freebsd-openoffice Thu Oct 10 17:32:34 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491D237B401; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 17:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts23.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.185]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6845243ED4; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 17:32:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([65.93.135.49]) by tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021011003229.TFMW24834.tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net@localhost.localdomain>; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:32:29 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Kevin B. Hendricks" To: dev@porting.openoffice.org, Martin Blapp , Alexander Kabaev Subject: Re: [porting-dev] FreeBSD: Uncatched exception problem Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:31:00 -0400 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] Cc: , , References: <20021011004639.F15308-100000@levais.imp.ch> <200210102010.56071.kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: <200210102010.56071.kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <200210102031.00496.kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca> Sender: owner-freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi, One other thing, if it is over the component interface (possibly the bridge itself) then the shared libs would be dlopened and not directly linked. I am not sure if that is an importnat distinction but we could modify the test case to dlopen the libraries instead of linking directly to them. Again, this is just a wag. I would guess the best way to examine this issue to to create a debug version of the stack walkback code having it print out everyting it does during the walkback to see if something screams at us. Not being able to recreate it on my machine certainly makes debugging it a real guessing game. Sorry I can't be more help, Kevin On October 10, 2002 08:10, Kevin B. Hendricks wrote: > On October 10, 2002 07:59, Martin Blapp wrote: > Hi, > > Specifically have you tried changing optimization levels, adding > -fpermissive, -fexceptions, etc. > > Also, what about not using -fPIC (I use that becuase it is needed on ppc > Linux, but the x86 build doesn't always use it for some reason)? > > Perhaps compiling main with -fno-exceptions and using -fexceptions on > the two libs in the example? > > I am really grasping at straws here. Both methods in the real OOo code > are threaded so perhaps that matters? > > I will take another look at those routines to see ifanything strange > might be done (use of alloca etc) but I can't figure out why a throw > can't be caught by the catch just two frames up in the backtrace. It > makes no sense. > > Kevin > > > Hi Alexander, Kevin, > > > > > You should compile and link this sample using the same options OO > > > uses to compile its components. The simple case of exceptions being > > > thrown across shared libraries is working fine, I assure you. > > > > Just did that. There is no change in the behaviour. Remember that > > I also used a version of linux's unxlngi4 includefile with the same > > settings to compile OpenOffice. No way. > > > > I also tried to compile everything with -frtti, but also no help. > > > > Martin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@porting.openoffice.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@porting.openoffice.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-openoffice" in the body of the message