[#5143] Win32API segfault in 1.8.3p1 — Nathaniel Talbott <ntalbott@...>
I'm on Windows XP, using VC7 to compile. I've previously gotten a good
Hi,
[#5151] COPY and INSTALL on Windows — Nathaniel Talbott <ntalbott@...>
1.8.3p1 has changed the defaults for the COPY and INSTALL Makefile
[#5152] 1.8.3 p1 segfault in array.c- bccwin32 - bcc5.5 (free) compiler bug — "daz" <dooby@...10.karoo.co.uk>
[#5160] Alternative for win32\ifchange.bat — "daz" <dooby@...10.karoo.co.uk>
[#5179] Cannot build HEAD on OS X 10.4.1 — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Somehow the rb_fd_init macro is conflicting with the definition of
Hi,
Hi,
[#5188] Re: IO#read — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Hi,
[#5190] Resolv and TTL — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
I would like to retrieve the TTL values from Resolv, but they seem to
[#5206] Object#inspect() doesn't return; uses 100% cpu — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
Is this something I could have caused by overriding some method on the
[#5211] ruby 1.8 CVS do not work with --enable-pthread configure option — noreply@...
Bugs item #2038, was opened at 2005-06-16 13:57
[#5215] Hackers Guide Translation Request! — "Charles E. Thornton" <ruby-core@...>
I have recently discovered RUBY and want to understand it a deep level -
[#5219] Segmentation fault in timeout.rb — Michel Pastor <K@...>
Hi,
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 05:03:18 +0900
Hi,
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:51:07 +0900
Hi,
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:28:53 +0900
Hi,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 23:05:56 +0900
[#5233] event_hook shows weirdness when invoked on mixed in methods — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
The following attachment, when run, shows the following behavior:
[#5264] XMLRPC vulnerabilities? — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
I've just seen this (by RSS)
[#5267] RubyUnit Test Ordering — Jordan Gilliland <jordan@...>
I'm using ruby 1.8.2 (2004-12-25) [i686-linux] and I've noticed that the
[#5277] Macros in win32.h — james@...
win32.h defines a load of macros. This means any C or C++ program which embeds
[#5288] committing rdoc additions corrections to head? — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
There is some discussion on ruby-doc about people documenting core
[#5296] Subversion — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...>
Hi,
Shugo Maeda wrote:
Curt Hibbs wrote:
On 6/30/05, Nikolai Weibull
Austin Ziegler wrote:
On 6/30/05, Nikolai Weibull
Austin Ziegler wrote:
On 6/30/05, mathew <meta@pobox.com> wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
On 7/1/05, mathew <meta@pobox.com> wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
On 7/1/05, Nikolai Weibull
Austin Ziegler wrote:
On 7/1/05, mathew <meta@pobox.com> wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
On Thursday 30 June 2005 19:19, mathew wrote:
"Sean E. Russell" <ser@germane-software.com> writes:
On 30 Jun 2005, at 08:19, Shugo Maeda wrote:
Hi,
Ruby missing directory licensing issues
[I tried to send this to ruby-core earlier, but wasn't subscribed. I CC'd debian-legal. I am now subscribed, but intend to not be subscribed as soon as this message is posted, so please CC me] I've been really enjoying Ruby on Rails recently. So, I wanted to add the Ruby license to the FSF's license list (the summary is that the license on its own isn't free, while in disjunction with the GPL, it is, so Ruby as a whole is OK). But I discovered that the license text specifically exempted some files in the missing directory. I investigated, and it turns out that there's only a few files that have genuine licensing issues. These files may no longer be relevant anyway, since operating systems are much more complete. I didn't need any of them to build on Debian. I'm including a list of these files, in the hope that they can be replaced in the next version of Ruby. I'm basing this all on the Debian package of ruby 1.8.2 -- if things have changed since then, please disregard this message. Also, I haven't reviewed the rest of Ruby; since it isn't mentioned in the license, I assume it's all under the Ruby disjunctive license. These should be replaced or relicensed (organized by license): "follows Ruby's license" (This is unclear -- does it mean the Ruby License, or the disjunction? Also, there's no copyright notice): x68.c os2.c Non-free (and incompatible with the GPL) license: * If you want it, it's yours. All I ask in return is that if you * figure out how to do this in a Bourne Shell script you send me * a copy. mkdir.c No license at all: flock.c fileblocks.c (but no content, so it's OK) file.h erf.c (4.4bsd-lite has a version of this) crypt.c (ditto) ---- This file could use a notice change, because it uses the old BSD license. UC has given permission to remove the advertising clause, so this is a very minor issue: vsnprintf.c ---- The remaining files are OK: a simple permissive license: strtoul.c strtod.c public domain: strtol.c strstr.c strncasecmp.c strcasecmp.c strftime.c strerror.c strchr.c memmove.c memcmp.c isnan.c isinf.c hypot.c finite.c dup2.c alloca.c acosh.c -- -Dave Turner GPL Compliance Engineer Support my work: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=novalis&p=FSF