On 11/2/10 3:48 PM, Pete Gregory wrote:
> Even with a 64-bit kernel, under bash4.1-2 under ubuntu 10.04, problems exist
> with numbers beyond 2147483646.
>
> Easy duplication method:
> echo {2147483640..2147483646}
> reports
> 2147483640 2147483641 2147483642 2147483643 2147483644 2147483645 214
Marc Herbert writes:
> #0 __lll_lock_wait_private () at
> ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/lowlevellock.S:97
> #1 0x00323007c138 in _L_lock_9162 () at malloc.c:3503
> #2 0x003230079a32 in __libc_malloc (bytes=215557320320) at malloc.c:3657
> #3 0x004664c3 in xmalloc (by
Le 02/11/2010 19:48, Pete Gregory a écrit :
> Easy duplication method:
> echo {2147483640..2147483646}
> reports
> 2147483640 2147483641 2147483642 2147483643 2147483644 2147483645 2147483646
> echo {2147483640..2147483647}
> dies with a malloc error
- At other times I get this error:
*** gli
Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 03:48:49PM -0400, Pete Gregory wrote:
echo {2147483640..2147483647}
dies with a malloc error
In bash 4.1.9 under HP-UX 10.20, it consumes all available CPU until
I kill it with SIGKILL. (I suppose there's a chance it might eventually
have died due
> echo {2147483640..2147483647}
> dies with a malloc error
I suggest that Linux kids do not try this at home: the OutOfMemory killer
killed a few random processes of mine!
On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 03:48:49PM -0400, Pete Gregory wrote:
> echo {2147483640..2147483647}
> dies with a malloc error
In bash 4.1.9 under HP-UX 10.20, it consumes all available CPU until
I kill it with SIGKILL. (I suppose there's a chance it might eventually
have died due to malloc errors or w
Even with a 64-bit kernel, under bash4.1-2 under ubuntu 10.04, problems exist
with numbers beyond 2147483646.
Easy duplication method:
echo {2147483640..2147483646}
reports
2147483640 2147483641 2147483642 2147483643 2147483644 2147483645 2147483646
echo {2147483640..2147483647}
dies with a mall
