bug#60488: closed (string-ref segfaults with n < 0 on Guile 3.0.8)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Mon, 2 Jan 2023 10:01:26 +0100
with message-id <AC6768F2-F7CD-4116-9631-B199A17789C6@abou-samra.fr>
and subject line Re: bug#60488: string-ref segfaults with n < 0 on Guile 3.0.8
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #60488,
regarding string-ref segfaults with n < 0 on Guile 3.0.8
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
60488: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=60488
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: string-ref segfaults with n < 0 on Guile 3.0.8
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 02 Jan 2023 04:24:22 +0000
>
>
>
>
> On 02.01.2023 05:12, festerdam@posteo.net wrote:
> > The following code results in a segmentation fault on Guile
> > 3.0.8-deb+3.0.8-2 (obtained from the Debian repositories):
> >     (string-ref "my string" -3)
> >
> > gdb's backtrace is the following:
> >
> > #0  0x00007ffff7f1bcc5 in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #1  0x00007ffff7f26c49 in scm_call_n ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #2  0x00007ffff7e97b29 in scm_apply_0 ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #3  0x00007ffff7f15966 in scm_throw ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #4  0x00007ffff7f174e9 in scm_ithrow ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #5  0x00007ffff7e94735 in scm_error_scm ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #6  0x00007ffff7e94790 in scm_error ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #7  0x00007ffff7ee19e7 in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #8  0x00007ffff7ee208b in scm_to_uint64 ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #9  0x00007ffff7f1c5e4 in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #10 0x00007ffff7f26c49 in scm_call_n ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #11 0x00007ffff7e93a97 in scm_primitive_eval ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #12 0x00007ffff7e99a86 in scm_eval ()
> >    from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #13 0x00007ffff7ef91c6 in scm_shell () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #14 0x00007ffff7ea865c in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #15 0x00007ffff7e91f6a in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #16 0x00007ffff7f194e8 in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #17 0x00007ffff7f26c49 in scm_call_n () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #18 0x00007ffff7e936ea in scm_call_2 () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #19 0x00007ffff7f42292 in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #20 0x00007ffff7f0ff4f in scm_c_catch () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #21 0x00007ffff7e942e6 in scm_c_with_continuation_barrier () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #22 0x00007ffff7f14b89 in ?? () from 
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #23 0x00007ffff7c190e7 in GC_call_with_stack_base () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgc.so.1
> > #24 0x00007ffff7f0fe68 in scm_with_guile () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #25 0x00007ffff7eb1185 in scm_boot_guile () from
> > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> > #26 0x000055555555510f in ?? ()
> > #27 0x00007ffff7c9918a in __libc_start_call_main
> > (main=main@entry=0x5555555550b0, argc=argc@entry=1,
> > argv=argv@entry=0x7fffffffe0b8) at
> > ../sysdeps/nptl/libc_start_call_main.h:58
> > #28 0x00007ffff7c99245 in __libc_start_main_impl (main=0x5555555550b0,
> > argc=1, argv=0x7fffffffe0b8, init=<optimized out>, fini=<optimized
> > out>, rtld_fini=<optimized out>, stack_end=0x7fffffffe0a8) at
> > ../csu/libc-start.c:381
> > #29 0x00005555555551aa in ?? ()
>
> Sorry, didn't see #59874. This bug report is a duplicate of that bug. 
> Therefore this should be closed.
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#60488: string-ref segfaults with n < 0 on Guile 3.0.8
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 2 Jan 2023 10:01:26 +0100
>
>
>
>
>
> > Le 2 janv. 2023 à 09:54, festerdam@posteo.net a écrit :
> > 
> > On 02.01.2023 05:12, festerdam@posteo.net wrote:
> >> The following code results in a segmentation fault on Guile
> >> 3.0.8-deb+3.0.8-2 (obtained from the Debian repositories):
> >>    (string-ref "my string" -3)
> >> gdb's backtrace is the following:
> >> #0  0x00007ffff7f1bcc5 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #1  0x00007ffff7f26c49 in scm_call_n ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #2  0x00007ffff7e97b29 in scm_apply_0 ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #3  0x00007ffff7f15966 in scm_throw ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #4  0x00007ffff7f174e9 in scm_ithrow ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #5  0x00007ffff7e94735 in scm_error_scm ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #6  0x00007ffff7e94790 in scm_error ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #7  0x00007ffff7ee19e7 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #8  0x00007ffff7ee208b in scm_to_uint64 ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #9  0x00007ffff7f1c5e4 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #10 0x00007ffff7f26c49 in scm_call_n ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #11 0x00007ffff7e93a97 in scm_primitive_eval ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #12 0x00007ffff7e99a86 in scm_eval ()
> >>   from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #13 0x00007ffff7ef91c6 in scm_shell () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #14 0x00007ffff7ea865c in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #15 0x00007ffff7e91f6a in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #16 0x00007ffff7f194e8 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #17 0x00007ffff7f26c49 in scm_call_n () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #18 0x00007ffff7e936ea in scm_call_2 () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #19 0x00007ffff7f42292 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #20 0x00007ffff7f0ff4f in scm_c_catch () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #21 0x00007ffff7e942e6 in scm_c_with_continuation_barrier () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #22 0x00007ffff7f14b89 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #23 0x00007ffff7c190e7 in GC_call_with_stack_base () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgc.so.1
> >> #24 0x00007ffff7f0fe68 in scm_with_guile () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #25 0x00007ffff7eb1185 in scm_boot_guile () from
> >> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libguile-3.0.so.1
> >> #26 0x000055555555510f in ?? ()
> >> #27 0x00007ffff7c9918a in __libc_start_call_main
> >> (main=main@entry=0x5555555550b0, argc=argc@entry=1,
> >> argv=argv@entry=0x7fffffffe0b8) at
> >> ../sysdeps/nptl/libc_start_call_main.h:58
> >> #28 0x00007ffff7c99245 in __libc_start_main_impl (main=0x5555555550b0,
> >> argc=1, argv=0x7fffffffe0b8, init=<optimized out>, fini=<optimized
> >> out>, rtld_fini=<optimized out>, stack_end=0x7fffffffe0a8) at
> >> ../csu/libc-start.c:381
> >> #29 0x00005555555551aa in ?? ()
> > 
> > Sorry, didn't see #59874. This bug report is a duplicate of that bug. 
> > Therefore this should be closed.
> > 
> > 
> > 
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---