Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='x86_64-pc-lin ux-gnu'
-DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/
IMHO any user action should not lead to SIGSEGV! I am not objecting against
recursive "sourse" itself. But when I got SIGSEGV from "bash", I have no
idea why this is happened. I have made recursive "sourse" by mistake and
spend a lot of time looking up what exactly lead to SIGSEGV.
Put a configura
2014-08-28 11:30 GMT-07:00 Eric Blake :
> On 08/28/2014 12:02 PM, bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> > IMHO any user action should not lead to SIGSEGV! I am not objecting
> against
> > recursive "sourse" itself. But when I got SIGSEGV from "bash", I have no
> > idea why this is happened. I have made
2014-08-28 11:54 GMT-07:00 Greg Wooledge :
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:49:02AM -0700, bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> > So why I should got SIGSEGV instead of nice, detailed error message in
> > recursion? We can detect it?
>
> You can't detect that it's going to happen. You can only receive th
2014-08-28 12:08 GMT-07:00 Eric Blake :
> On 08/28/2014 12:49 PM, bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > If follow this logic - we shoul try to catch incorrect user behaviour...
> we
> > will got errors/signals from kernel.
> >
> > Simple situation:
> > $ ((1/0))
> > bash: ((: 1/0: division by 0 (er
2014-08-28 13:59 GMT-07:00 Bob Proulx :
> bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Eric Blake wrote:
> > > bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > IMHO any user action should not lead to SIGSEGV! I am not objecting
> against
> > > > recursive "sourse" itself. But when I got SIGSEGV from "bash", I
> have
2014-08-28 14:43 GMT-07:00 Eric Blake :
> On 08/28/2014 03:00 PM, bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Whey there is check on division by zero? We can predict this? - No. But
> >> we
> >>> can detect it... and we out nice, detailed error message.
> >>
> >> Actually, division by zero is fairly easy
2014-08-28 14:57 GMT-07:00 Eric Blake :
> On 08/28/2014 03:50 PM, bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Any action in my script should lead to SIGSEGV in interpreter! If I write
> > program on some compilable language, for example C, compile it and got
> > SIGSEGV - this is my problem. But in this ca
2014-08-28 15:11 GMT-07:00 Chris Down :
> bogun.dmit...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> Is it so heavy to check length of $BASH_SOURCE array?
>>
>
> Adding artificial barriers that don't actually solve the problem are
> "heavy" in terms of technical debt, even if not code.
>
Ok. Please remove FUNCNEST limi
2014-08-28 15:32 GMT-07:00 Eric Blake :
> On 08/28/2014 04:11 PM, bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> If gcc segfaults because it implements #include via recursion, and I
> >> wrote a recursion loop of #includes into my source, then I'd say the bug
> >> was mine, not gcc's. Just the same as if yo
2014-08-28 15:44 GMT-07:00 Chris Down :
> bogun.dmit...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> And what for this mailing list? Don't answer, this have no any sense any
>> more.
>>
>
> This mailing list is for reporting bugs. So far nobody thinks that what
> you reported is a bug, so you would essentially be makin
2014-09-03 7:31 GMT-07:00 Chet Ramey :
> On 8/28/14, 2:02 PM, bogun.dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
> > IMHO any user action should not lead to SIGSEGV! I am not objecting
> against
> > recursive "sourse" itself. But when I got SIGSEGV from "bash", I have no
> > idea why this is happened. I have made rec
12 matches
Mail list logo
