From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by coral.primenet.com.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA06325 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:52:18 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA22418; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 20:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 20:49:34 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <960825175026.ZM16431@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 17:50:26 -0700 In-Reply-To: Zoltan Hidvegi "Re: Reliable zsh-3.0.0 core dump" (Aug 26, 1:59am) References: <199608252359.BAA30725@hzoli.ppp.cs.elte.hu> Reply-To: schaefer@nbn.com X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.729 29jul96) To: Zoltan Hidvegi Subject: Re: Reliable zsh-3.0.0 core dump Cc: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Xli8w2.0.9U5.TIF8o"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/2074 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu On Aug 26, 1:59am, Zoltan Hidvegi wrote: } Subject: Re: Reliable zsh-3.0.0 core dump } } > I can't get a core dump either if I use --enable-zsh-mem ... only with } > the system malloc. I hadn't tried zsh-mem before. } } Did you try --enable-zsh-{debug,mem{,-debug},secure-free}? Yes; they produced no warnings, and of course the core dump didn't happen even with nothing more than --enable-zsh-mem, so ... } The patch below fixes a bug which may cause that. No such luck. I still get a core dump. } While testing this I } also discovered that pipe synchronization was really necessary. Can you say a bit about why (and maybe add a comment to the code!)? } > In the second case, the built-in alias of run-help to man expanded before } > help was invoked; in the first case it did not. I think it should be } > consistent (and I think the first case is how it should work, i.e. don't } > expand the alias, but that's less important). } > } > Or is this intentional and simply not documented? } } It is half-intentional. When the current word for completion is requested } from the lexer alias expansion is disabled for that word which is good and } reasonable. The same mechanism is used by run-help. I agree that alias expansion should be disabled for the current word; I just think it should also be disabled for run-help no matter what word is "current." For run-help's purposes only the word in command position is interesting. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.nbn.com/people/lantern New male in /home/schaefer: >N 2 Justin William Schaefer Sat May 11 03:43 53/4040 "Happy Birthday"