From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2643 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: pierre Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: dladdr() Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:27:46 +0100 Message-ID: <1358836066.2172.45.camel@6-core> References: <1358254713.32505.27@driftwood> <1358261684.3766.10.camel@6-core> <20130115184820.GA20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1358334018.2170.23.camel@6-core> <20130116125119.GA27914@port70.net> <50F6B818.1070807@gmail.com> <20130116164943.GD20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <50F6E698.3070604@gmail.com> <20130121020335.GO20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1358751500.2196.20.camel@6-core> <20130121183523.GP20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1358836070 27848 80.91.229.3 (22 Jan 2013 06:27:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 06:27:50 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com, Rich Felker Original-X-From: musl-return-2644-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue Jan 22 07:28:09 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TxXL3-0000vx-IZ for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:28:05 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 9858 invoked by uid 550); 22 Jan 2013 06:27:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 9850 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2013 06:27:46 -0000 Original-Reply-To: pierre@silentlife.com In-Reply-To: <20130121183523.GP20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2643 Archived-At: Rich, > I don't see how any of these could crash without > memory already having been corrupted. That's what I wrote previously: my code populates backtraces which could have been damaged by stack smashing. Backtraces are used to identify the cause of a crash, which, by definition, may not be clean. The information I wanted you guys to have is that, for the same application code, both GLIBC and musl compiled in DEBUG mode do not crash (while musl in release mode crashes). > Do you have a test case I could run, In my previous email (the one you are answering) I wrote: "I did not have time to isolate the problem in a reproducible code snippet but I will let you know when I have done that." > have you tried building libc with -g and examining > the crash in gdb to see where it happens? In my previous email (the one you are answering) I wrote: "for my main application (which populates backtraces with dladdr), musl dladdr() works in DEBUG mode and crashes in RELEASE mode." The musl "DEBUG mode" tested here used -g2 and it did not crash. I am not trying to argue with you - there's no point at doing that - I was merely providing the information I had available when you asked "does it work for you?". Pierre