Yeah, a threading bug sounds less likely.

Anyway, the first "is 0 bytes after a block" sounds like what Mast
described earlier and pretty harmless compared to the last one. Google
tells me one can run gdb and valgrind together; try stopping at the
last error, focus on frame for image_jpeg_encode and see what pointers
gets passed to jpeg_write_scanlines. It would be interesting to see if
they are reasonable blocks that can be traced to a struct *image or if
the Pike internals are messed up.

If they are ok I'd suspect the library itself (especially if you say
that most images can't trigger the bug), and the next step would
perhaps be to compile your own with debug symbols and optimizations
off.
  • 7.8 alpha 2 Mirar @ Pike developers forum
  • 7.8 alpha 2 Mirar @ Pike developers forum
    • 7.8 alpha 2 Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum
    • 7.8 alpha 2 Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum
      • 7.8 alpha 2 Mirar @ Pike developers forum
        • 7.8 alp... Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum
        • 7.8 alp... Per Hedbor () @ Pike (-) developers forum
          • 7.8... Mirar @ Pike developers forum
            • ... Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum
              • ... Mirar @ Pike developers forum
              • ... Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum
              • ... Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum
  • Re: 7.8 alpha 2 Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum

Reply via email to