[#11890] Ruby and Solaris door library — "Hiro Asari" <asari.ruby@...>

Hi, there. This is my first patch against ruby. I think I followed

19 messages 2007/08/13
[#11892] Re: Ruby and Solaris door library — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/08/14

Hiro Asari wrote:

[#11899] pack/unpack 64bit Integers — Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@...>

Hi,

13 messages 2007/08/14
[#11903] Re: pack/unpack 64bit Integers — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2007/08/15

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:50:01AM +0900, Hadmut Danisch wrote:

[#11948] Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — David Flanagan <david@...>

I just noticed that my ruby1.9 build of August 17th includes a Fiber

22 messages 2007/08/22
[#11949] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/08/22

David Flanagan wrote:

[#11950] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...> 2007/08/22

On 8/22/07, Daniel Berger <djberg96@gmail.com> wrote:

[#11952] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/08/22

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:50:12 +0900, "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@gmail.com> wrote:

[#11988] String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — "Vincent Isambart" <vincent.isambart@...>

I saw that Matz just merged his M17N implementation in the trunk.

17 messages 2007/08/25
[#11991] Re: String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — "Michael Neumann" <mneumann@...> 2007/08/25

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 10:54:20 +0200, Yukihiro Matsumoto

[#11992] Re: String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/08/25

Hi,

[#12042] Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes? — David Flanagan <david@...>

This message contains queries that probably only Matz can answer:

16 messages 2007/08/31
[#12043] Re: Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/08/31

Hi,

IO#seek and whence problem

From: Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
Date: 2007-08-14 10:17:17 UTC
List: ruby-core #11894
Hi,

on exactly 1 of 5 machines here I have a problem
installing Gems. The tar unpacker just hangs. On the Gentoo
mailing list I found another user who encounters the same:

  <http://marc.info/?l=gentoo-user&m=118237767604668&w=4>
  <http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182826>

I analysed the problem and found that the IO#seek function
doesn't work proper. I larded the sources with output
statements and get the following output:

  seeking: 512 + 176
  rb_io_seek_m: whence=1
  rb_io_seek: pos=176, whence=0
  now at: 176
 
The outer two lines come from Tar#each_entry in rubygem's
`lib/rubygems/package.rb卒 where I say

    if @io.respond_to? :seek
      # avoid reading...
      $stderr.puts "seeking: #{@io.tell} + #{size-entry.bytes_read}"
      @io.seek(size - entry.bytes_read, IO::SEEK_CUR)
      $stderr.puts "now at: #{@io.tell}"
      $stdin.gets
    else
      ..

The outer ones are printf statements in the rb_io_seek*
functions in `io.c卒.

    fprintf( stderr, "rb_io_seek_m: whence=%d\n", whence);
    return rb_io_seek(io, offset, whence);

and

    fprintf( stderr, "rb_io_seek: pos=%d, whence=%d\n", pos, whence);
    pos = io_seek(fptr, pos, whence);

I have no idea what goes wrong here.

In case you need further information, please tell me.

Bertram


-- 
Bertram Scharpf
Stuttgart, Deutschland/Germany
http://www.bertram-scharpf.de


In This Thread

Prev Next