* Geert Uytterhoeven [160328 10:33]:
> > I really don't want to add another patch except for critical issues
> > (and that are likely to be applied to 2.3) at this point - so ... No.
>
> "tail call overwriting the (non-existing) argument" sounds like a security
> issue that may be exploitable, ev
(Removed bug from CC, this is not about the bug anymore.)
* John Paul Adrian Glaubitz [160328 10:45]:
> On 03/28/2016 01:18 AM, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote:
> >> The PTS says "LowNMU" for ruby2.3 which clearly means "Do an NMU without
> >> asking if you want to fix something" [1]. If that's not
Geert Uytterhoeven writes:
> "tail call overwriting the (non-existing) argument" sounds like a security
> issue that may be exploitable, even on non-m68k.
It's only a problem if the argument is passed on the stack.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 5
On 03/28/2016 01:18 AM, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote:
>> The PTS says "LowNMU" for ruby2.3 which clearly means "Do an NMU without
>> asking if you want to fix something" [1]. If that's not what you want,
>> don't use that tag.
>
> You're mistaken. The "tag" is per-maintainer, and you need to look
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote:
> * John Paul Adrian Glaubitz [160327 23:00]:
>> Here's an updated patch which contains the actual changes that upstream
>> committed to the git repository to close the upstream bug 12118 [1].
>>
>> Would be possible to cherry-pick th
* John Paul Adrian Glaubitz [160328 01:16]:
> >> I'd be happy to perform
> >> an NMU as well to fix the issue. I assume that should be okay since
> >> ruby2,3 is LowNMU?
> >
> > You're misreading what the PTS says and what the actual case is.
>
> The PTS says "LowNMU" for ruby2.3 which clearly m
* John Paul Adrian Glaubitz [160327 23:00]:
> Here's an updated patch which contains the actual changes that upstream
> committed to the git repository to close the upstream bug 12118 [1].
>
> Would be possible to cherry-pick this fix from upstream until the
> changes have been backported to ruby
On 03/28/2016 01:08 AM, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote:
> We're waiting for a whole list of more important issues to be
> backported to the 2.3 branch (there haven't been any backports or
> point releases so far).
That's ok.
> I really don't want to add another patch except for critical issues
> (a
Hi!
Here's an updated patch which contains the actual changes that upstream
committed to the git repository to close the upstream bug 12118 [1].
Would be possible to cherry-pick this fix from upstream until the
changes have been backported to ruby2.3? I'd be happy to perform
an NMU as well to fix
Control: tags -1 +patch
Control: forwarded -1 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12118
Hi!
Andreas Schwab just provided an updated patch which actually fixes the
problem, I was now able to build ruby2.3 successfully on m68k. Attaching
the patch.
Upstream has also implemented some changes to addre
On 02/27/2016 09:52 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I rememeber we had a similar issue on ruby2.2, so it might be possbible that
> the patch suggested by Andreas Schwab back then [2] might help.
Ok, this patch doesn't help for ruby2.3. The problem still persists. So,
apparently, this is a d
Source: ruby2.3
Version: 2.3.0-2
Severity: normal
User: debian-68k@lists.debian.org
Usertags: m68k
Hi!
ruby2.3 currently fails to build from source with a segmentation fault late
in the build process while running 'make install' [1]:
./miniruby -I./lib -I. -I.ext/common ./tool/
_type*
std::_Bvector_base<_Alloc>::_M_allocate(size_t)':
/usr/lib/gcc/m68k-linux-gnu/4.0.1/../../../../include/c++/4.0.1/bits/stl_bvector.h:389:
internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.or
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been forwarded to the package maintainer(s)
and to other interested parties to accompany the original report.
Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
Debian GCC Maintainers
If you
Stephen Gran writes:
> Package: gcc-4.0
> Version: 4.0.1-2
> Followup-For: Bug #317475
>
> Also see
> http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=gmp&ver=4.1.4-8&arch=m68k&stamp=1121077632&file=log&as=raw
Please extract the preprocessed source, and forward the bug report
upstream. See http://lists.de
This one time, at band camp, Matthias Klose said:
> Stephen Gran writes:
> > Package: gcc-4.0
> > Version: 4.0.1-2
> > Followup-For: Bug #317475
> >
> > Also see
> > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=gmp&ver=4.1.4-8&arch=m68k&stamp=1121077632&file=log&as=raw
>
> Please extract the preproces
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 12:41:32PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I have a sparse knowledge of this that and the other thing but for the most
> part I am a newbie.
>
> I have a 128k linux server and when I command adduser there was and error
> segmentation fault what s
I have a sparse knowledge of this that and the other thing but for the most
part I am a newbie.
I have a 128k linux server and when I command adduser there was and error
segmentation fault what should be the cause for this problem and how to fix it
I'm looking forward for your help, as w
I have a sparse knowledge of this that and the other thing but for the most
part I am a newbie.
I have a emailserver and when I command adduser there was and error
segmentation fault what should be the cause for this problem and how to fix it
I'm looking forward for your help, as what I
19 matches
Mail list logo
