[#10830] New kill_thread function in eval.c conflict with a BeOS system function — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #9736, was opened at 01/04/2007 16:20
[#10834] Hefty patch for mkmf.rb — <noreply@...>
Patches item #9762, was opened at 2007-04-02 09:55
[#10853] Why limit class def to a constant or colon node? — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>
Is there a historical reason why I can't do something like these:
Hi,
On 4/3/07, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com> wrote:
[#10867] defined? operator changed in ruby 1.9: bug or feature? — David Flanagan <david@...>
The behavior of the defined? operator is different in current ruby 1.9
Hi,
[#10875] Ruby shouldn't process shebang! — "Kirill A. Shutemov" <k.shutemov@...>
> echo -e '#!test\nputs "test passed"' | ruby=20
On 4/5/07, Kirill A. Shutemov <k.shutemov@gmail.com> wrote:
[#10884] Ruby 1.9/1.8 compatibility: String#lines — murphy <murphy@...>
It seems the most important change in 1.9, in terms of compatibility, is
[#10907] install (/bin/install) path hardcoded at build — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10004, was opened at 2007-04-10 13:21
[#10909] Turning off verbose output for mkmf — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi all,
[#10923] block_given? => true in main(). — "Adam Bozanich" <adam.boz@...>
Hi all.
[#10933] Cannot build with extra library path if previous version already installed — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10140, was opened at 2007-04-16 17:32
Hi,
On 4/16/07, nobu@ruby-lang.org <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
On 4/19/07, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:> Hi,>> At Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:21:44 +0900,> Michal Suchanek wrote in [ruby-core:10960]:> > Yes. And this should also apply to extensions. The mkmf tests are now> > fine but the extension is linked with -L/sw/lib before -L../..>> Indeed.>>> Index: configure.in> ===================================================================> --- configure.in (revision 12191)> +++ configure.in (working copy)> @@ -1385,5 +1385,4 @@ if test "$enable_rpath" = yes; then> fi>> -LDFLAGS="-L. $LDFLAGS"> AC_SUBST(ARCHFILE)>This would break the previous fix so I did not even try to apply this ^
Hi,
[#10944] IRHG - "Three Stuffing" — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>
Can a japanese speaker give a translation
[#10947] backwards compatibility for 'raise Interrupt' — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
** BEFORE:
Hi,
Hi,
[#10968] IRHG - Manuscript Hunt — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>
Does anyone know of a Text Copy (Not PDF) of this manuscript:
[#10981] ruby 1.9 crash on cygwin — "Anton Ivanov" <Anton.Ivanov@...>
Hi,
[#11003] miniruby loads extensions from already installed ruby — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10303, was opened at 2007-04-23 10:44
Hi,
On 23/04/07, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
On 26/04/07, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
[#11012] Ruby 1.9: multiple splats on rvalues in parallel assignment — David Flanagan <david@...>
This has got to be a bug...
[#11025] gsub with backslash characters in replacement string — "Adam Bozanich" <adam.boz@...>
Hello, spotted this one the other day:
Hi,
On 4/26/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
On 4/26/07, Adam Bozanich <adam.boz@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/26/07, Marte Raphael Y. Soliza <myrtactle@gmail.com > wrote:
[#11029] Proc#arity regression or bug in RDoc — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 06:55:46PM +0900, Mauricio Fernandez wrote:
[ ruby-Bugs-2727 ] XMLRPC::ParseContentType#parse_content_type raises non-XMLRPC exception
Bugs item #2727, was opened at 2005-10-27 21:44
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=2727&group_id=426
Category: Standard Library
Group: None
Status: Closed
Resolution: Out of Date
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Luke Kanies (lkanies)
Assigned to: Nobody (None)
Summary: XMLRPC::ParseContentType#parse_content_type raises non-XMLRPC exception
Initial Comment:
I have now run into this problem multiple times. I keep managing to send data that XMLRPC is not expecting, and the call to 'split' in this method (XMLRPC::ParseContentType#parse_content_type) raises a NoMethodError exception instead of an XMLRPC exception:
test_logclient(TestLogger)
[logger.rb:140:in `test_logclient'
logger.rb:135:in `each'
logger.rb:135:in `test_logclient']:
Exception raised:
Class: <NoMethodError>
Message: <"private method `split' called for nil:NilClass">
---Backtrace---
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/xmlrpc/utils.rb:166:in `parse_content_type'
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/xmlrpc/client.rb:538:in `do_rpc'
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/xmlrpc/client.rb:409:in `call2'
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/xmlrpc/client.rb:399:in `call'
This call to 'split' should be protected with begin/rescue blocks, so that it raises the correct kind of exception, or the parent call should do so.
This time the problem occurred because I have an xmlrpc method that does not have a return value, so I wasn't returning anything, which resulted in nil content, which threw everything off. Having the XMLRPC method return "" fixed the bug, but it seems like error handling for this case should be better.
Thanks,
Luke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Robert Read (rread)
Date: 2007-04-10 11:56
Message:
I'm seeing this in 1.8.6, and this ccurs whenever Content-Type is not set in the response. This simple patch avoids the error in that case, and assumes the data is xml:
Index: lib/xmlrpc/client.rb
===================================================================
--- lib/xmlrpc/client.rb (revision 12167)
+++ lib/xmlrpc/client.rb (working copy)
@@ -546,15 +546,17 @@ module XMLRPC
raise "HTTP-Error: #{resp.code} #{resp.message}"
end
- ct = parse_content_type(resp["Content-Type"]).first
- if ct != "text/xml"
- if ct == "text/html"
- raise "Wrong content-type: \n#{data}"
- else
- raise "Wrong content-type"
+ unless resp["Content-Type"].nil?
+ ct = parse_content_type(resp["Content-Type"]).first
+ if ct != "text/xml"
+ if ct == "text/html"
+ raise "Wrong content-type: \n#{data}"
+ else
+ raise "Wrong content-type"
+ end
end
end
-
+
expected = resp["Content-Length"] || "<unknown>"
if data.nil? or data.size == 0
raise "Wrong size. Was #{data.size}, should be #{expected}"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Ryan Davis (zenspider)
Date: 2006-11-01 23:19
Message:
I'm closing this bug due to its age / staleness. I simply can't triage them all and I have
to cut corners somewhere. If you believe this bug still exists in the latest version of
ruby 1.8.x, please reopen it and, if you can, attach a minimally reproducible test case
to help us repro it in 1.8.x (where x >= 5).
Thank you for your support. Things will get better.
Ryan Davis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Luke Kanies (lkanies)
Date: 2006-01-16 18:18
Message:
I can't seem to replicate this bug. I didn't notice your
comment until just now, which is why it's taken so long for
me to respond.
Isn't it at least reasonable to add some protection around
that call, since you've got output showing it's possible to
end up with nil there?
I've written up an example that comes as close as I could to
replicating what I am doing; incidentally, it fails with a
RuntimeError instead of an XMLRPC error, but I guess that
would be a different bug.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Nobody (None)
Date: 2005-11-01 02:44
Message:
Could you please submit a little example code snippet (client and server), where this bug occurs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=2727&group_id=426