Hi, 2011/6/2 Michael Maclean <mich...@no-surprises.co.uk>
> On 02/06/11 18:20, Gustavo Lopes wrote: > >> Em Thu, 02 Jun 2011 18:10:50 +0100, Ilia Alshanetsky <i...@prohost.org> >> escreveu: >> >> Killing TSRMLS_FETCH is a noble goal, but let's keep it to once patch >>> at a time please ;-) And for the record I am all for killing >>> TSRMLS_FETCH. >>> >>> >> Is there any advantage in killing it as opposed to simply not use it? >> > > I think he meant just replacing it in this patch. > > Just to inform, with the patched applied in trunk we have 4 SIGSEGVs with ext/pcntl tests: pcntl_alarm() [ext/pcntl/tests/pcntl_alarm.phpt] pcntl_signal() [ext/pcntl/tests/pcntl_signal.phpt] pcnt_signal_dispatch() [ext/pcntl/tests/pcntl_signal_dispatch.phpt] Closures as a signal handler [ext/pcntl/tests/signal_closure_handler.phpt] And 1 test hanging: ext/pcntl/tests/002.phpt -- Regards, Felipe Pena
