Mailing List Archive

Next patch, Larry and we
Today I got hit by the "DESTROYS wipe out the $@" bug, and spend
innumerable time in debugger trying to understand what happens.

I was absolutely sure this patch made it into 5.001n :-( .

OK, so here is my question: There are plenty of C code patches flying
around that are assigned NET... numbers and have N in "resolved"
slot. Will we do Larry a honor if we consolidate them into
experimental patch level?

If this will simplify Larry's life, then we should simplify Andy's
one: a lot of this patches are obsoleted by some other patches. Why
the venerable authors of patches will not peruse bugs-by-author
database and report patches that are still hot?

Ilya
Re: Next patch, Larry and we [ In reply to ]
On Tue, 07 Nov 1995 06:22:34 EST, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:
>Today I got hit by the "DESTROYS wipe out the $@" bug, and spend
>innumerable time in debugger trying to understand what happens.
>
>I was absolutely sure this patch made it into 5.001n :-( .
>

I have suggested the G_KEEPERR patch for 1o to Andy. Meanwhile,
you can get it from:

http://www-personal.engin.umich.edu/~gsar/

>OK, so here is my question: There are plenty of C code patches flying
>around that are assigned NET... numbers and have N in "resolved"
>slot. Will we do Larry a honor if we consolidate them into
>experimental patch level?

I saw some bugs that were gone as of 5.001m that were marked "unresolved"
and reported them a while back. I might do that again if I get some
time today evening.

>
>If this will simplify Larry's life, then we should simplify Andy's
>one: a lot of this patches are obsoleted by some other patches. Why
>the venerable authors of patches will not peruse bugs-by-author
>database and report patches that are still hot?

I try to keep the patches on the site above relevent to the most
current (unofficial) patchlevel. I haven't looked at all of the
recent patches to 1n, and will add them in time.

- Sarathy.
gsar@engin.umich.edu
Re: Next patch, Larry and we [ In reply to ]
On Tue, 07 Nov 1995 12:12:07 EST, I wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Nov 1995 06:22:34 EST, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:
>>OK, so here is my question: There are plenty of C code patches flying
>>around that are assigned NET... numbers and have N in "resolved"
>>slot. Will we do Larry a honor if we consolidate them into
>>experimental patch level?
>
>I saw some bugs that were gone as of 5.001m that were marked "unresolved"
>and reported them a while back. I might do that again if I get some
>time today evening.
>

OK, here are the "severe" bugs that are fixed in 1n, but still marked as
"unresolved" in the bugs list:

NETaa14696 951007 N 2 Tom Christiansen small bad free text case
NETaa14438 950724 N 2 Ilya Zakharevich tkperl -d bug
NETaa14421 950717 N 2 Anthony Heading $_ doesn't undef
NETaa13753 950314 N 2 Trey Boudreau P-magic doesn't interpolate right

Check out what 1n prints for Tom's testcase in NETaa14696, by the way :-)

The following are the same (should be filed under same number):

NETaa14751 951023 N 2 Tim Bunce array of undefs is falsely false
NETaa14680 950919 N 2 Michael Peppler Testing an array with undef values in it


- Sarathy.
gsar@engin.umich.edu
Re: Next patch, Larry and we [ In reply to ]
On Tue, 7 Nov 1995, Gurusamy Sarathy wrote:

> OK, here are the "severe" bugs that are fixed in 1n, but still marked as
> "unresolved" in the bugs list:

Of course I issued patch.1n *after* Tom updated the bug list. Still,
grep NET patch.1n
should give a list of at least some of the Bugs addressed by patch.1n.

In some cases, I wasn't able to identify a particular entry with a
particular patch, but I included the patch anyway.

Andy Dougherty doughera@lafcol.lafayette.edu
Re: Next patch, Larry and we [ In reply to ]
>Of course I issued patch.1n *after* Tom updated the bug list. Still,
> grep NET patch.1n
>should give a list of at least some of the Bugs addressed by patch.1n.

I'll get an update pretty soon.

--tom
Re: Next patch, Larry and we [ In reply to ]
Gurusamy Sarathy writes:
>
> OK, here are the "severe" bugs that are fixed in 1n, but still marked as
> "unresolved" in the bugs list:
>
> NETaa14696 951007 N 2 Tom Christiansen small bad free text case
> NETaa14438 950724 N 2 Ilya Zakharevich tkperl -d bug
> NETaa14421 950717 N 2 Anthony Heading $_ doesn't undef
> NETaa13753 950314 N 2 Trey Boudreau P-magic doesn't interpolate right
>
> Check out what 1n prints for Tom's testcase in NETaa14696, by the way :-)
>
> The following are the same (should be filed under same number):
>
> NETaa14751 951023 N 2 Tim Bunce array of undefs is falsely false
> NETaa14680 950919 N 2 Michael Peppler Testing an array with undef values in it
>
>
> - Sarathy.
> gsar@engin.umich.edu
>

Here are my patches that are marked as unresolved today (or missing
from DB):

NETaa14715 was hit by mimimod.pm change, I have a newer variant.

NETaa14715 951010 N 2 Ilya Zakharevich C++ perl
NETaa14099 950318 N 3 Ilya Zakharevich possible bug with overloading
NETaa14753 951025 N 3 Ilya Zakharevich debugging with autoload

Segfault in pp_caller will probably be NETaa14843 or so.

Patches for Carp will probably be NETaa14817 or so.

Ilya