On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> In theory, one could change the functions in history.c and histfile.c to
> change the in-memory history list to one that uses a file, possibly with
> mmap().
> I'd be happy to look at contributed code to do this [..]
would you accept a soluti
Chet Ramey writes ("Re: Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on
ftp.gnu.org"):
> I will put tarballs with patches in the usual places within a few days.
Thanks, that would be very helpful.
For the future, it might be worth considering whether it's really
sensible, nowadays, to be dis
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 11:19:55AM +0100, Piotr Grzybowski wrote:
> would you accept a solution like this:
>
> 1. all running instances of bash with history support on, share
> history via shmem segment (some care as to its size should be taken)
> ...
As long as it is off by default. This is th
On 11/6/14, 7:47 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Chet Ramey writes ("Re: Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on
> ftp.gnu.org"):
>> I will put tarballs with patches in the usual places within a few days.
>
> Thanks, that would be very helpful.
>
> For the future, it might be worth consider
On 11/6/14, 5:19 AM, Piotr Grzybowski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>>
>> In theory, one could change the functions in history.c and histfile.c to
>> change the in-memory history list to one that uses a file, possibly with
>> mmap().
>> I'd be happy to look at contribu
Hi all,
A memory leak has been reported in a bash script I maintain [1]. After
investigation, I was able to shrink the test case down to:
while true
do
sleep 1 &
wait $!
done
The above loop has an always-rising memory consumption (RSS value as
reported by ps -o rss.) This one OTO
Chet Ramey writes ("Re: Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on
ftp.gnu.org"):
> On 11/6/14, 7:47 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > But in the current environment it's looking rather quaint. We could
> > probably provide a full tarball for each patch release.
>
> That is supposed to be one
On Nov 6, 2014, at 10:14 AM, Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Chet Ramey writes ("Re: Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on
> ftp.gnu.org"):
>> On 11/6/14, 7:47 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> But in the current environment it's looking rather quaint. We could
>>> probably provide a full tarball
Chet Ramey wrote:
> (The link is to
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/bash.git/snapshot/bash-master.tar.gz). I
> cannot change the main bash webpage to include that text.
I'm not sure what you mean by that last sentence; but just in case you
don't know, anyone with write access to the code repo
On 11/6/14, 12:02 PM, Glenn Morris wrote:
> Chet Ramey wrote:
>
>> (The link is to
>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/bash.git/snapshot/bash-master.tar.gz). I
>> cannot change the main bash webpage to include that text.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by that last sentence; but just in case you
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: darwin14.0.0
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='darwin14.0.0' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0'
-DCONF_VENDOR='apple' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/local/
On 11/6/14 8:09 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A memory leak has been reported in a bash script I maintain [1]. After
> investigation, I was able to shrink the test case down to:
>
> while true
> do
> sleep 1 &
> wait $!
> done
This isn't a memory leak, and the memory use is b
12 matches
Mail list logo
