[#1834] New syck bug — Chad Fowler <chad@...>
There is a new syck bug that appears to be caused by the recent fix for
[#1836] exit inside test/unit — nobu.nokada@...
Hi,
On Dec 1, 2003, at 02:55, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
[#1843] DRb tests hang on OS X 10.3.1 — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>
I haven't yet been able to test this on another platform to see if it
[#1846] Re: Constants, class variables and the cbase field — george.marrows@...
> What kind of behavior do you want (to change)? Remember you're saying
Hi,
On Monday 01 December 2003 06:44 pm, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 02 December 2003 04:02 am, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#1884] multiple exceptions for assert_raises — nobu.nokada@...
Hi,
Hi,
On Dec 4, 2003, at 02:34, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
On Dec 4, 2003, at 01:35, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
On Dec 4, 2003, at 10:39, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
[#1901] Test::Unit problem — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi,
[#1914] -Wall warnings from 1.8.1 p3 — Daniel Berger <djberge@...>
Here are some potentially significant warnings from 1.8.1 p3
nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
[#1932] --enable-pthread broken? — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>
[ruby-talk: 87759] and the surrounding thread seem to indicate that
Hi,
On Dec 11, 2003, at 11:49, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>>>>> "N" == Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@talbott.ws> writes:
Hi,
On Dec 11, 2003, at 16:10, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
On Dec 11, 2003, at 20:48, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
>>>>> "Y" == Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:
Hi,
>>>>> "Y" == Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:
Hi,
>>>>> "Y" == Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:
Hi,
[#1936] Can't define +@ for Symbol (plus ruby install problem) — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
I wanted to see if the +@ problem was fixed in 1.8.1 preview 3 but when I do
Hi,
On Friday 12 December 2003 02:39 am, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Hi.
Hi,
[#1973] Where to install documentation — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
Folks:
Hi,
Dave Thomas (dave@pragprog.com) wrote:
>
>> Using the standard install.rb, anything you include in a project's
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 03:52:26PM +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:
Hi,
[#2013] Mixin Module, Possible Bug? — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
According to Pickaxe, Ch. 19, pg. 245, under Mixin Modules:
[#2037] --enable-pthread still segfaults... — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>
I've finally been able to test my application under load using the
Hi,
On Dec 23, 2003, at 14:17, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Dec 23, 2003, at 14:34, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Dec 23, 2003, at 14:44, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
> I'm afraid you're using old configure file. Can you wipe off old
On Dec 23, 2003, at 15:18, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
In message "Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults..."
On Dec 23, 2003, at 16:34, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Dec 23, 2003, at 17:04, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Dec 23, 2003, at 17:29, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
[#2071] rdoc is broken in 1.8.1 — Alexander Bokovoy <a.bokovoy@...>
Greetings!
[#2084] Error with Socket.getaddrinfo on OS X — Richard Kilmer <rich@...>
On OS X Panther:
[#2101] Can't call to_s on a frozen Date — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Interesting...
[#2102] syck segfaults when used in rdoc — Alexander Bokovoy <a.bokovoy@...>
Greetings!
>>>>> "A" == Alexander Bokovoy <a.bokovoy@sam-solutions.net> writes:
On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 11:41:49PM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "A" == Alexander Bokovoy <a.bokovoy@sam-solutions.net> writes:
Hi,
[#2122] Bad interaction between timeout.rb and --enable-pthread — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>
Here's a testcase that shows the problem:
I should have reduced it more before posting...
Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
On Jan 1, 2004, at 11:29, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
On Jan 1, 2004, at 12:14, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
Re: --enable-pthread broken?
On Dec 11, 2003, at 20:48, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> Nathaniel, let me ask you few more questions before start fighting.
>
> * did --enable-pthread help your programs from blocking?
I can't say. --enable-pthread caused the segfault, so I don't think the
app could get to the point where it would block. I have not been able
to test my larger program with Nobu's patch and --enable-pthread yet.
But since killer.rb has the blocking problem with the patch and
--enable-pthread, I don't really want to test my larger program under
load again until the problem in killer.rb is resolved.
> * if I understand you correctly, after applying Nobu's patch, simple
> killer.rb in [ruby-core:1938] start blocking, right?
I think killer.rb would have blocked eventually anyhow, but never got
that far before Nobu's patch because of the segfault. So I wouldn't
think Nobu's patch has anything to do with the blocking; rather it just
allowed the interpreter to run long enough to hit the block condition.
> * thus, killer.rb does blocks whether --enable-pthread is applied or
> not, correct?
I have only had killer.rb block so far with --enable-pthread... I am
testing it now to see if I can get it to block without
--enable-pthread. However I have had my main app block without
--enable-pthread. To summarize:
| enable-pthread |
| with (unpatched) | with (patched) | without |
---------------------------------------------------------------
Main app | segfault | untested | blocked |
---------------------------------------------------------------
killer.rb | segfault | blocked | inconclusive |
I hope this helps; please let me know if there's any more information
you need. I'll let you know if I manage to get killer.rb to block
without --enable-pthread.
Thanks,
Nathaniel
<:((><