From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23092 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2000 09:41:49 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (HELO sunsite.auc.dk) (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 8 Nov 2000 09:41:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 27620 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2000 09:41:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 13129 Received: (qmail 27613 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2000 09:41:43 -0000 Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:41:41 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200011080941.KAA21063@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Fri, 3 Nov 2000 15:42:30 +0000 Subject: Re: zsh-3.1.9-dev-6 crashes occassionally Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Nov 1, 10:41am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > } > } Here's the second version, still not-to-be-committed. > > Of course, the question is, does this actually fix Thomas's crash? I've seen Thomas' reply. But: is this really the question? Without such a trap-handling delay and with the code not protecting critical code sections as it is now (without the patch), crashes like these can always happen. And the code is full of critical sections because there are many, many places where we access global data structures. However, the patch is so deep in the guts of zsh that I hesitate to decide if it should be committed, especially if Bart says things like the above ;-). I've been using it on my laptop ever since I posted it and didn't have any problems but I don't use TRAPALRM(), so that means almost nothing (but Peter and I made sure the trap-tests still work correctly). Anyway, Peter has the newest version of this patch, together with his trap-changes. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de