From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15218 invoked by alias); 13 Nov 2009 18:39:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 15210 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Nov 2009 18:39:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:39:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.17]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nADIcUB0025318 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:38:30 -0500 Received: from zebedee.pink (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nADIcS07017629; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:38:29 -0500 Message-ID: <4AFDA7A3.7070205@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:39:00 -0000 From: Andrew Haley User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090825) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jack Howarth CC: Eric Botcazou , java@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix oddity in personality routine References: <200911131850.03946.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <4AFD9DEF.7050305@redhat.com> <20091113183623.GB22010@bromo.med.uc.edu> In-Reply-To: <20091113183623.GB22010@bromo.med.uc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-11/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2 Jack Howarth wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 05:57:03PM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: >> Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> >>> Hence the attached patch, that I don't plan to test though. OK anyway? >>> >>> >>> 2009-11-13 Eric Botcazou >>> >>> * exception.cc (PERSONALITY_FUNCTION): Fix oversight. >>> >> >> Yes, I think that's right. = > Do you think this could be the origin of the problems we have had > on intel darwin with gcj compiling java files? Perhaps. I never guess such things: I always attach a debugger. Andrew.