Martin Lucina

Yes. You probably want to look at #325 first though.

This is partially addressed by documenting the intended behaviour in `solo5.h` in #407. Actually enforcing this for `hvt` and `spt` is surprisingly hard due to the bindings-owned manifest structures being...

Fundamentally, this is a layering issue. `__stack_chk_fail` is part of the C compiler runtime, of which _there can be only one_. If we make it a weak symbol, that solves...

> The issue is that the unikernel knows best how to handle the failure, like logging an appropriate error in the right place. No it doesn't. If you land in...

> They might have a usecase where they have a cloud server, and you configure it to restart itself when something bad happens The Solo5 `__stack_chk_fail()` exits with the equivalent...

@alfred-bratterud: > Is it a goal for Solo5 to provide more of this runtime in the future or is going to be just this one function? This will be important...

@alfred-bratterud Sorry, I spent half a day writing the above text, I'm surprised that it's not clear. Quoting the important part: > In order for the Solo5 ABI as defined...

The comment is a bit misleading. There are two notions of "exit code" involved: 1. The `status` passed to `solo5_exit()`. This is just an `int`. 2. The exit code returned...

@adamsteen Thanks for confirming. Let me know how it goes with the UNIX version, or if you have any questions on how to put that together.

@adamsteen I can also reproduce the behaviour on 6.5 with your UNIX version. So, I suggest asking on `tech@` what people think and whether or not this is a bug....