similar to: confusing name mangling results

I think so. There have been other reports lately related to this being wrong. http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14410 CC'ing Timur since he might know more about this. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:27 PM, David Nadlinger <code at klickverbot.at>wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > >> My question: Is there an easy way

2013/2/21 Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info>: > The patch looks incorrect. The code just needs to handle \1 properly > and clang extended to add explicit \1 to the names which does not > require mangling. I think clang already adds \01 to __stdcall names, so only the LLVM change is remaining. > I do not think that moving whole mangling to clang is a good idea, >

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: >> My question: Is there an easy way of disabling the name-mangling part >> but keep the rest of the CC that I missed? > if you use "\1" + "usual name", it will disable name mangling if you are > lucky. A leading \1 is LLVM's way of saying: leave this name alone! Seems like

The patch looks incorrect. The code just needs to handle \1 properly and clang extended to add explicit \1 to the names which does not require mangling. I do not think that moving whole mangling to clang is a good idea, because then everyone who uses LLVM to call WinApi functions will need to mangle by hands. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:25 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com>

Anton, what do you think of David's patch with this test case? OK to commit that? On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Anton Korobeynikov < anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: > The patch looks incorrect. The code just needs to handle \1 properly > and clang extended to add explicit \1 to the names which does not > require mangling. > > I do not think that moving whole

I don't remember anything other that what I've written in the bug João has mentioned. Probably something like this patch http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14410#c6 ? 2013/2/20 João Matos <ripzonetriton at gmail.com>: > I think so. There have been other reports lately related to this being > wrong. > > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14410 > > CC'ing

Hi, I have to apologise: I edited a moderator comment into a message that was pgp-signed. I must say that I normally notice the PGP signature and put comments on those messages in the end, but I must have missed it this time. I''m sorry for the confusion that this must''ve caused. Roger.

Sorry but I've missed something somewhere... HPUX 10.01 , NIS Samba 1.9.18p2 win 3.51 ws client service pack 5 A users is trying to map a home share with directories "Mail" and "mail" and see both as the individual directories that they are. I've tried the name mangling options in smb.conf with no luck what-so-ever. Debug=3 shows (./Mail) and [Mail] as the directory

Hi, I just tried changing a samba 3.0.9 server's config from mangling method = hash2 to mangling method = hash and on a WinXP client I see a filename ".foo" change to it's mangled form "FOO~00.___". Is this a bug? -- Steve Bennett, Systems Support, Lancaster University

Hi, I'm trying to get my samba to force 8.3 compliant names to lower case, but they stay upper case. I've tried adding mangle case = yes, but testparm reports unknown parameter, while it is in the man page. Was this a known issue? should I upgrade? share definition [sys] path=/sys writable=yes force user = advantage preserve case = yes default case = lower mangle case = yes short

I am migrating a rather large Windows 2k fileserver to samba. I have acl's working acceptably in samba, but am having trouble getting data from the windows server, to the Samba server with all (would settle for most) of the permissions intact. Have tried XCOPY, and various backup, and archiving programs, and while most of the ACL's make it over, the "owner" permission seems to

I've just bumped into a name mangling issue with Samba which I'm sure people have already found before me...... If you create 2 files called moss_burn.bmp & moss_bend.bmp on a Samba share that has been mapped to a drive under windows then a 'dir' in a DOS shell will show that the 8.3 filenames of these two files are identical......MOSS_~UV.BMP... which is not good for legacy

Hi all, banging my head on the wall here... I think I'll never really understand codepages stuff. smbd is v 3.0.1, client is french win98 - yuk my smb.conf reads: unix charset = UTF-8 display charset = UTF-8 dos charset = CP850 when I create a folder/file with accents in it, I can create it ok, but reading proves impossible. If i create file ??????, it shows ok in the file explorer

Hello, could anyone give me a working configuration (only the 3 or 4 lines required for the desired settings) for our Win95 / WinNT4.0-Clients. Our samba server: 1.9.18p7 Our customers would drag and drop a file within the browsers from a local drive (for example C:) to a SAMBA-connetced network drive *WITHOUT* changing anything within the file name (length, case etc.). I would be glad to get

Hi all, can somebody help me? What does it mean the parameter "mangling method = hash"? Thanks L. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! – Get yours free!

The Identifiers section in the LLVM language manual states: "The "\01" prefix can be used on global variables to suppress mangling." Is this for global variables only, or global values in general, such as functions also? In implementation LLVM seems to have this behavior of suppressing mangling even for functions and aliases. Thanks, Gautam

How can I declare a function prototype in C/C++ such that the gcc front end won't mangle the name? I was told that extern would work once but it doesn't.

The symbols I'm interested in already have internal linkage (as you would expect). But because the mangler is in charge of assigning them names, they never seem to be decorated with the 'L' in front. . . . -bw On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> wrote: > Can symbols with external linkage but no name be converted > to have internal linkage?

On Nov 24, 2008, at 11:01 AM, Bill Wendling wrote: > The symbols I'm interested in already have internal linkage (as you > would expect). But because the mangler is in charge of assigning them > names, they never seem to be decorated with the 'L' in front. . . . If you use SET_DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME (something like that) you can specify the full name for this stuff, including

On Nov 24, 2008, at 11:07 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Nov 24, 2008, at 11:01 AM, Bill Wendling wrote: > >> The symbols I'm interested in already have internal linkage (as you >> would expect). But because the mangler is in charge of assigning them >> names, they never seem to be decorated with the 'L' in front. . . . > > If you use