Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 12:17:47 +0200 From: Tobias Kortkamp <tobik@freebsd.org> To: wjw@digiware.nl Cc: freebsd current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Changes to backtrace() ?? Message-ID: <YN7ny0jQT3Y8D/38@urd.tobik.me> In-Reply-To: <73332c15-d597-0dee-4af8-1c11101a8aef@digiware.nl> References: <73332c15-d597-0dee-4af8-1c11101a8aef@digiware.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--6Ph3H3+IoR+sbUu5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 11:52:14AM +0200, Willem Jan Withagen via freebsd-c= urrent wrote: > Hi, >=20 > Have there been changes in the backtrace() calls? > I recently upgraded my current server, and now the Ceph backtrace test > starts to fail.... >=20 > It looks like it is implemented in the llvm code. > So it could be that something is off in that code. lang/rust also fails to build on at least aarch64 after the LLVM12 import (the prebuilt bootstrap crashes). Very similar backtrace. See https://bugs.freebsd.org/256864 --6Ph3H3+IoR+sbUu5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGTBAEBCgB9FiEElXvTEJc6ePgdQuobpPCftzzFH2EFAmDe58hfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDk1 N0JEMzEwOTczQTc4RjgxRDQyRUExQkE0RjA5RkI3M0NDNTFGNjEACgkQpPCftzzF H2HboQf9Gi1fQ3GayaLH80BtuDGSB0knPi9NRI9bQh2+2l59khLAr2I7C0gQE6HH armO7IT5peC5OwL+sOOERfTJy2hxIKTXBc22rTIU92T7DLkF4SDf0pSs2cJTsIHK 2imlM5+ENdiY4FS+HHDOxkSFZKdcZNMvAQs9GN24r1VLQlsZmL45nMwLh1E6bvfX xmuayta5zlwCUOpByurd5oAAzClRAmOu/cvS/1XuJEor+/6j6gOMg85PLzNJKkoK /XoQ1xs5EmNza0XSLAGxsad0LMHVu0rB+NM5xiOSG2u6RvF8WiL5UQueBzt1Uh+a x95GRTJ9x5lOwz+7b/Rn78T5fBdjVg== =tqst -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6Ph3H3+IoR+sbUu5--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YN7ny0jQT3Y8D/38>