public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/51197] [4.7 Regression] Backtrace information less useful
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:09:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-51197-4-ynrBsu9RGo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-51197-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51197
Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed| |2011-11-18
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-18 13:44:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> So it would be nice to actually write the SIG* information also
> to stderr.
(In reply to comment #3)
> So to get back to the stdout/stderr issue, in 4.7 the last line of the output
> is not printed by libgfortran but rather by the OS (libc?) default signal
> handler for that signal (just like happens with -fno-backtrace). So libgfortran
> has no say in where it goes.
Harald, does this solve the issue? Or do you think that gfortran should replace
the standard handler?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-18 13:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-17 20:17 [Bug fortran/51197] New: " anlauf at gmx dot de
2011-11-17 20:25 ` [Bug fortran/51197] " kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-17 20:55 ` anlauf at gmx dot de
2011-11-18 7:34 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-18 14:09 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2011-11-18 19:51 ` anlauf at gmx dot de
2011-11-23 20:31 ` anlauf at gmx dot de
2011-11-23 21:00 ` anlauf at gmx dot de
2011-12-05 14:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-12-06 14:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-09 19:54 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-09 19:55 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 9:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-51197-4-ynrBsu9RGo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).