[#11073] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10527, was opened at 2007-05-02 14:42
14 messages
2007/05/02
[#11142] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2007/05/10
Hi,
[#11188] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...>
2007/05/16
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:51:18PM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
[#11189] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2007/05/17
Hi,
[#11192] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2007/05/17
Hi,
[#11195] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...>
2007/05/17
This seems to make valgrind much happier.
[#11196] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...>
2007/05/17
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 11:14:35PM +0900, Paul Brannan wrote:
[#11197] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2007/05/17
Hi,
[#11199] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...>
2007/05/17
Now 'a' shows up twice in the local table:
[#11202] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2007/05/18
Hi,
[#11082] Understanding code: Kernel#require and blocks. — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
I'm trying to debug a Rails application which complains about an
9 messages
2007/05/03
[#11083] Re: Understanding code: Kernel#require and blocks.
— George <george.ogata@...>
2007/05/04
On 5/4/07, Hugh Sasse <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
[#11084] Re: Understanding code: Kernel#require and blocks.
— Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
2007/05/04
On Fri, 4 May 2007, George wrote:
[#11086] Re: Understanding code: Kernel#require and blocks.
— Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...>
2007/05/04
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 06:18:19PM +0900, Hugh Sasse wrote:
[#11108] pattern for implementation-private constants? — David Flanagan <david@...>
Hi,
7 messages
2007/05/07
[#11109] Re: pattern for implementation-private constants?
— "Nathan Weizenbaum" <nex342@...>
2007/05/08
I believe there isn't a way, but I don't think it's really necessary. Just
[#11127] Bugs that can be closed — "Jano Svitok" <jan.svitok@...>
I propose closing these bugs as invalid:
6 messages
2007/05/09
[#11145] Rational comparison to 0 fails when denominator is != 1 — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10739, was opened at 2007-05-10 22:06
4 messages
2007/05/10
[#11149] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10739 ] Rational comparison to 0 fails when denominator is != 1
— Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
2007/05/10
Hi,
[#11169] Allow back reference with nest level in Oniguruma for Ruby again — =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Wolfgang_N=E1dasi-Donner?= <wonado@...>
Remark: I posted this text in comp.lang.ruby first, but Matz told me,
5 messages
2007/05/15
[#11173] Re: [Minor Change Proposal] Allow back reference with nest level in Oniguruma for Ruby again
— =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Wolfgang_N=E1dasi-Donner?= <wonado@...>
2007/05/15
Does it make sense or is it required to write this as a RCR?
[#11176] FileUtils.rm_rf misfeature? — johan556@...
Hi!
7 messages
2007/05/16
[#11210] Pathname ascend and descend inclusive parameter — TRANS <transfire@...>
I would like to suggest that Pathname#ascend and Pathname#descend
4 messages
2007/05/20
[#11234] Planning to release 1.8.6 errata — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>
Hi all.
17 messages
2007/05/25
[#11235] Re: Planning to release 1.8.6 errata
— Calamitas <calamitates@...>
2007/05/25
On 25/05/07, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#11252] Init_stack and ruby_init_stack fail to reinit stack (threads problem?) — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #11134, was opened at 2007-05-25 12:14
6 messages
2007/05/26
[#11253] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-11134 ] Init_stack and ruby_init_stack fail to reinit stack (threads problem?)
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2007/05/26
Hi,
[#11264] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-11134 ] Init_stack and ruby_init_stack fail to reinitstack(threads problem?)
— gga <ggarra@...>
2007/05/27
Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
[#11255] ruby_1_8_6 build problem (make install-doc) — johan556@...
Hi!
4 messages
2007/05/26
[#11271] providing better support through rubyforge tracker categories — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
I'm going to make more categories for the trackers (bugs and patches)
7 messages
2007/05/27
[#11367] BUG: next in lambda: 1.8.6 differs from 1.8.4 and 1.9.0 — David Flanagan <david@...>
A toplevel next statement in a lambda does not return a value in 1.8.6,
4 messages
2007/05/30
[#11368] $2000 USD Reward for help fixing Segmentation Fault in GC — Brent Roman <brent@...>
9 messages
2007/05/31
[#11372] Re: $2000 USD Reward for help fixing Segmentation Fault in GC
— "sur max" <sur.max@...>
2007/05/31
Hi Brent,
Re: two fixes for sync.rb: sync_try_lock, Err.Fail
From:
"Dmitry Borodaenko" <angdraug@...>
Date:
2007-05-09 22:34:04 UTC
List:
ruby-core #11126
On 5/9/07, Dmitry Borodaenko <angdraug@gmail.com> wrote: > Attached are fixes for sync.rb, both the current stable version and > the version in the SVN trunk. This couldn't go out without some suspense, could it? ;-) Really attached it this time. -- Dmitry Borodaenko
Attachments (2)
sync.rb-1.8.6-fix.diff
(591 Bytes, text/x-diff)
--- sync.rb.dpkg-dist 2007-05-08 23:35:15.000000000 +0100
+++ sync.rb 2007-05-09 01:04:37.000000000 +0100
@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@
# exceptions
class Err < StandardError
def Err.Fail(*opt)
+ Thread.critical = false
fail self, sprintf(self::Message, *opt)
end
@@ -129,10 +130,10 @@
# locking methods.
def sync_try_lock(mode = EX)
- return unlock if sync_mode == UN
+ return unlock if mode == UN
Thread.critical = true
- ret = sync_try_lock_sub(sync_mode)
+ ret = sync_try_lock_sub(mode)
Thread.critical = false
ret
end
sync.rb-1.9-fix.diff
(387 Bytes, text/x-diff)
--- sync.rb.trunk 2007-05-08 22:05:19.000000000 +0100
+++ sync.rb 2007-05-08 23:46:20.000000000 +0100
@@ -127,9 +127,9 @@
# locking methods.
def sync_try_lock(mode = EX)
- return unlock if sync_mode == UN
+ return unlock if mode == UN
@sync_mutex.synchronize do
- ret = sync_try_lock_sub(sync_mode)
+ ret = sync_try_lock_sub(mode)
end
ret
end