From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21129 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2013 19:40:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 31724 Received: (qmail 6920 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2013 19:40:07 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DOS_RCVD_IP_TWICE_B autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at archlinux.de designates 144.76.107.12 as permitted sender) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 21:33:15 +0200 From: Pierre Schmitz To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: Segfault on "task " with zsh 5.0.2 Organization: Arch Linux In-Reply-To: <20130913122426.GA19439@sym.noone.org> References: <20130913122426.GA19439@sym.noone.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: pierre@archlinux.de User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.9.4 Am 13.09.2013 14:24, schrieb Axel Beckert: > Hi Peter, > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 09:37:32AM +0100, Peter Stephenson wrote: >> Looks like a memory error. Does valgrind give any extra hints? > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:51:39PM +0100, Peter Stephenson wrote: >> Might not be related, but it's hard to be sure --- if there is bad >> memory around, the completion system has a good chance of being the part >> that falls over it. > > Ah, did you mean malfunctioning RAM as in "hardware defect"? > > But shouldn't it be then less easy to reproduce as different memory > areas should be in use when trying it a day later or so? > > The machine is a Xen DomU virtual machine btw. -- not sure if that > makes a difference here. Seems like some people have a similar or the same problem though: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/35736 -- Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com