From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27575 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2007 23:23:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 27526 invoked by uid 48); 19 Jan 2007 23:23:09 -0000 Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 23:23:00 -0000 From: "cagney at redhat dot com" To: frysk-bugzilla@sourceware.org Message-ID: <20070119232308.3898.cagney@redhat.com> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug general/3898] New: fstack and fhpd disagree on backtrace format X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Mailing-List: contact frysk-bugzilla-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-bugzilla-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q1/txt/msg00120.txt.bz2 List-Id: fstack and fhpd format their stack backtraces differently. ex#1: fstack: #0 0x556402 in __kernel_vsyscall () fhpd: # 0 0xcd3402 in __kernel_vsyscall at #0 fstack is better, << at #0 >>, which is a non-existant line, shouldn't be included. ex#2: fstack: #5 0x81133e9 in _start () from: ../../stack.c#225 fhpd: # 5 0x81133e9 in _start at ../../stack.c#225 (ignoring that I strongly doubt that "_start" is in stack.c), their output should be consistent. Likely there should be a generic method, that when passed a stack backtrace formats it to a writer. -- Summary: fstack and fhpd disagree on backtrace format Product: frysk Version: unspecified Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: general AssignedTo: frysk-bugzilla at sourceware dot org ReportedBy: cagney at redhat dot com OtherBugsDependingO 2244,2246 nThis: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3898 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.