[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-gawk] $0 reassignment corruption in 4.2

From: David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
Subject: Re: [bug-gawk] $0 reassignment corruption in 4.2
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 17:28:04 +0100

Hello guys! :)

Is the commit 064d78b562c9670751c48673c6d1d171aff51a42 in the gawk-4.2-stable the final fix for this issue, or can I expect more commits to land in that branch? I don't want to make a new package in Fedora before this issue is resolved.

Best regards,

David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
Associate Software Engineer

Brno, Czech Republic

Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted | Red Hat.

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Andrew J. Schorr <address@hidden> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 09:05:26AM -0500, Andrew J. Schorr wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 08:53:14AM -0500, Andrew J. Schorr wrote:
> > Combined patch attached. Eric -- can you please confirm this fixes your issue?
> >
> > Arnold -- does this look right to you? I haven't chased down all the nuances
> > of what this assign function is doing...
> Note: we may have a similar ordering problem at debug.c:1301.

So don't we need the attached patch to match the new ordering in interpret.h?
I'm not sure how to test this...

> And at interpret.h:373, I'm not sure how Op_field_spec_lhs really works and
> what's going on with the field_assign value...

Still a mystery to me.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]