[#83096] File.setuid? on IO (Re: [ruby-cvs:67289] normal:r60108 (trunk): file.c: release GVL in File.{setuid?, setgid?, sticky?}) — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
On 2017/10/04 8:47, normal@ruby-lang.org wrote:
5 messages
2017/10/04
[#83100] Re: File.setuid? on IO (Re: [ruby-cvs:67289] normal:r60108 (trunk): file.c: release GVL in File.{setuid?, setgid?, sticky?})
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2017/10/04
Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#83105] Re: File.setuid? on IO (Re: [ruby-cvs:67289] normal:r60108 (trunk): file.c: release GVL in File.{setuid?, setgid?, sticky?})
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2017/10/04
On 2017/10/04 15:55, Eric Wong wrote:
[#83107] Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes? — Alberto Almagro <albertoalmagro@...>
Hello,
9 messages
2017/10/04
[#83113] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— "Urabe, Shyouhei" <shyouhei@...>
2017/10/05
This has been requested countless times, then rejected each and every time.
[#83129] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— Alberto Almagro <albertoalmagro@...>
2017/10/05
Sorry I didn't found it on the core mail list's archive.
[#83138] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— "Urabe, Shyouhei" <shyouhei@...>
2017/10/06
Ruby has not been made of popular votes so far. You have to show us
[#83149] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2017/10/06
Alberto Almagro <albertoalmagro@gmail.com> wrote:
[#83200] [Ruby trunk Feature#13996] [PATCH] file.c: apply2files releases GVL — normalperson@...
Issue #13996 has been reported by normalperson (Eric Wong).
4 messages
2017/10/10
[ruby-core:83323] Re: [Ruby trunk Bug#14013] [PATCH] Webrick 60172 fix
From:
Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Date:
2017-10-17 16:31:51 UTC
List:
ruby-core #83323
Greg.mpls@gmail.com wrote: > diff --git a/lib/webrick/server.rb b/lib/webrick/server.rb > index 2d678273e5..57ffe5a48b 100644 > --- a/lib/webrick/server.rb > +++ b/lib/webrick/server.rb > @@ -295,12 +295,14 @@ def start_thread(sock, &block) > end > if sock.respond_to?(:sync_close=) && @config[:SSLStartImmediately] > WEBrick::Utils.timeout(@config[:RequestTimeout]) do > - > - # we must call OpenSSL::SSL::SSLSocket#accept_nonblock until > - # it stop returning wait_* symbols: > + > + # we must call OpenSSL::SSL::SSLSocket#accept_nonblock until it > + # stops returning wait_* symbols > + # accept_nonblock can only be called once on Windows That is bizarre and this is not the right place for platform-specific code. There's bound to be other places where SSLSocket#accept_nonblock is used like this... Also, does test/openssl/test_pair.rb work for you? Does it still work when the IO.select calls in test_connect_accept_nonblock_no_exception are replaced with corresponding IO#wait_*able calls? (I guess it's desirable to minimize dependencies in those tests, which is why IO.select is used instead of IO#wait_*able. Thanks. > case ret = sock.accept_nonblock(exception: false) > when :wait_readable, :wait_writable > sock.to_io.__send__(ret) > + break if /mingw|mswin/ =~ RUBY_PLATFORM > else > break > end while true Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>