GNU bug report logs -
#17168
24.3.50; Segfault at mark_object
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 04/06/2014 09:19 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:59:55 -0700
>> From: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
>> CC: dmantipov <at> yandex.ru, 17168 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>>
>>> As an alternative, would it make sense to try to understand why the
>>> problems started when they did? IOW, how come we never saw this until
>>> now?
>>
>> Who knows? The problem arises we happen to form a pointer on the stack
>> to an undead symbol, and *any* code change could be responsible for our
>> doing that more frequently. I don't see you can blame it on 114156.
>
> Then how do you explain that we never saw such problems, in all the
> years before?
It's probabilistic. How do you know we didn't?
>>> In http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=15583#23, Richard
>>> provided the last good revno (113938) and the first bad one (114268);
>>> I looked at that range of revisions, and 114156 looks relevant. How
>>> about if we revert it and see if the problems go away?
>>
>> The bug would still be there, and we'd have no way to tell whether your
>> proposed change actually reduced its occurrence to a tolerable level.
>> Why would you want to do that instead of just fixing the bug?
>
> Because it's simpler,
It's easy to make code that's simple and wrong.
> and because it just might be that the bug was
> caused by that other changeset.
How might that changeset in particular have caused the problem reports?
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]
This bug report was last modified 11 years and 47 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.