[#10193] String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

41 messages 2007/02/05
[#10197] Re: String.ord — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/02/06

Hi,

[#10198] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#10199] Re: String.ord — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/02/06

David Flanagan wrote:

[#10200] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#10208] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10213] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10215] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10216] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/07

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10288] Socket library should support abstract unix sockets — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8597, was opened at 2007-02-13 16:10

12 messages 2007/02/13

[#10321] File.basename fails on Windows root paths — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8676, was opened at 2007-02-15 10:09

11 messages 2007/02/15

[#10323] Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Some of the Ruby code used by TextMate makes use of xmlrpc/

31 messages 2007/02/15
[#10324] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2007/02/15

> -----Original Message-----

[#10326] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/15

On Feb 15, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Berger, Daniel wrote:

[#10342] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

While I am complaining about xmlrpc, we have another issue. It's

[#10343] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — Alex Young <alex@...> 2007/02/16

James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#10344] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Alex Young wrote:

Re: [ ruby-Bugs-8541 ] coredump when invoking Kernel:syscall

From: Tadashi Saito <shiba@...2.accsnet.ne.jp>
Date: 2007-02-11 06:55:30 UTC
List: ruby-core #10278
Hello all,

On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:30:41 +0900
Sam Roberts <sroberts@uniserve.com> wrote:

> If you provide more arguments than rb_f_syscall can use on your system,
> then it won't call syscall (and it will overwrite an array on the
> stack).

I see.  It must be a Ruby side's (and typical) bug.

I fixed up the patch so that the checking is performed only once.
How about for upcoming release? > knu-san and Urabe-san

Index: io.c
===================================================================
--- io.c	(revision 11701)
+++ io.c	(working copy)
@@ -5046,6 +5046,8 @@
     rb_secure(2);
     if (argc == 0)
 	rb_raise(rb_eArgError, "too few arguments for syscall");
+    if (argc > sizeof(arg)/sizeof(arg[0]))
+	rb_raise(rb_eArgError, "too many arguments for syscall");	
     arg[0] = NUM2LONG(argv[0]); argv++;
     while (items--) {
 	VALUE v = rb_check_string_type(*argv);

--
Tadashi Saito

In This Thread