[#4479] Requesting addition to IRB (configurable standard output) — Sascha Ebach <se@...>

Hello,

13 messages 2005/02/24
[#4482] Re: Requesting addition to IRB (configurable standard output) — Sam Roberts <sroberts@...> 2005/02/25

Quoting se@digitale-wertschoepfung.de, on Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 01:22:34AM +0900:

[#4483] Re: Requesting addition to IRB (configurable standard output) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2005/02/25

On 24 Feb 2005, at 19:51, Sam Roberts wrote:

[#4488] Re: Requesting addition to IRB (configurable standard output) — Sam Roberts <sroberts@...> 2005/02/26

Quoting drbrain@segment7.net, on Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 02:43:31AM +0900:

[#4489] Re: Requesting addition to IRB (configurable standard output) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2005/02/26

On 25 Feb 2005, at 16:03, Sam Roberts wrote:

Re: [BUG] Segmentation fault

From: Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Date: 2005-02-01 20:58:35 UTC
List: ruby-core #4350
On 01 Feb 2005, at 12:02, Andrew Walrond wrote:

> On Tuesday 01 February 2005 18:27, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In message "Re: [BUG] Segmentation fault"
>>
>>     on Wed, 2 Feb 2005 02:03:05 +0900, Eric Hodel 
>> <drbrain@segment7.net>
> writes:
>> |> Hope it might mean something to someone :)
>> |
>> |It would mean more with a backtrace, and if your Ruby was compiled 
>> with
>> |debugging symbols...
>>
>> And if the error reproducing Ruby program (along with input data) is
>> supplied.
>>
>
> Sorry guys. I always try my best to provide a patch, a testcase etc 
> (google me
> and you'll see what I mean) But I'm afraid its another of those 
> inherently
> unreproducible bugs. You're welcome to the code, but It's been run 
> thousands
> of times with the same dataset andlib/modules/fglrx/build_mod/ this is 
> the
> first (and last) time I've seen this particular segfault...

You should be able to at least get a core-file you can examine with 
gdb...  And compiling Ruby with debugging symbols makes things 
extra-helpful...

> I am pushing ruby quite hard with Rubyx, and do seem to turn up these
> unreproducible bugs (search back a couple months and you'll find the 
> last one
> I was shouting about which turned out to be a nasty garbage collector 
> bug,
> and really had me pulling my hair out :))
>
> The purpose of my brief post was because, from (...long...) 
> experience, it
> often useful for the author of code in question to have a quick look at
> possible failure modes in that area. I guess thats why the segfault 
> notice
> has file name and linenumber...

Unfortunately, Rational is pure-ruby, so the failure could be in eval 
or in the GC or somewhere else.

-- 
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E  7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04

Attachments (1)

PGP.sig (186 Bytes, application/pgp-signature)

In This Thread