[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Nano-devel] more patch updates, etc.

From: David Lawrence Ramsey
Subject: Re: [Nano-devel] more patch updates, etc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:10:43 -0800 (PST)

Jordi Mallach:
>On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 12:19:06PM -0800, David Lawrence Ramsey wrote:
>> All patches have been synced with nano 1.1.99-cvs (before the tweak to
>> do_preserve_msg(), though).
>I committed this because I thought it's better like this than as it was
>before, but I'd like to see some opinion on my proposal about removing
>it entirely.

I only meant that the patches aren't in sync with nano as of that
change.  As for my option on the removal, though, I've thought about it
and I'm with you.  If it's going to be in every 1.2.x version, it's
overkill IMHO.

>> Be warned: I won't be able to do any more work on nano for a little
>> while, because my hard disk crashed a few hours ago, and I don't have
>> access to another Linux box yet.
>Hmm. If you foresee this situation is going to take long, I'm happy to
>open an account for you at my server. It's not too well connected
>(ADSL), but it's better than nothing. You can also access sourceforge's
>shell (

According to what I heard last, it'll be a week or so.  If it ends up
being longer, there may be a problem.  Would you be so kind as to open
the account, so I can avoid that?  Thanks in advance.  (I've looked
into SourceForge, but I can't seem to find any direct reference to a
shell other than the compile farm.)

>Ah, an user reported a crasher with pre1. The fix for the open directory
>fix appears to be botched.
>Try "nano ." .

I thought the problem was only with inserting files.  Oh well.  The most
recent fixes added to nanomiscbugs5 handle problems similar to this,
though, including problems with nano crashing as soon as a user typed
anything if there was an error opening the file (i. e. if it was a
device file).  According to the trace I did, it was due to fileage's
being NULL; it turned out that there are cases where open_file()
generates an error opening a file, but doesn't call new_file(), meaning
that if fileage is NULL, it stays NULL, which causes the segfault
later.  I fixed this and the other bugs in open_file() in nanomiscbugs5
by adding fileage's being NULL to the conditions under which new_file()
was called, by adding error checks around the open_file() calls, etc.

What I'm trying to say is that maybe the fixes handle this problem, but
I'd have to (a) test it to be sure, and (b) strip out the other parts of
the patch if they do, which at least is relatively easy since these
fixes make up the bulk of the patch now.  In any case, I'll look into
this as soon as I can.

Sluggy.Net: The Sluggy Freelance Community!

Select your own custom email address for FREE! Get address@hidden w/No Ads, 
6MB, POP & more!

reply via email to

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