Re: A stack overflow problem.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> skribis:

> Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I think we need two different stack reserves: one that's used normally,
>> and another smaller one that's used within the debugger after a stack
>> overflow.  It should be possible to do some minor debugging after a
>> stack overflow: enough to see where the overflow happened and maybe look
>> at some stack frames to investigate why it happened.  The normal stack
>> reserve should be reinstated after leaving the debugger.
>
> Another option is to run the debugger in a freshly allocated stack.

This was vaguely considered back then: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?29574>.
However, given the bright future we’ll have in that regard, I’m
tempted to leave 2.0 as it is.

WDYT?

Ludo’.