Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
I think I am done with the Debian testing, and fixes, to *properly*
integrate ast-ksh.2013-10-10 into Debian, with functionality and scope
similar to Opensolaris PSARC/2006/550 - the shell is much more stable
now, and properly has all its builtins working.
Olga
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Oliver Kiddle okid...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
ольга крыжановская wrote:
What is the way to replace the patched up 2012-02-29? Find sponsor,
declare him how bad it is?
I think so.
One thought is that you could try to pester Jonathan Wiltshire
j...@debian.org: he did 93u+-1.2.
It is probably wise to prepare the replacement first.
Oliver
--
, __ ,
{ \/`o;-Olga Kryzhanovska -;o`\/ }
.'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanov...@gmail.com \-`\-'.
`'-..-| / http://twitter.com/fleyta \ |-..-'`
/\/\ Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer /\/\
`--` `--`
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
Phi Debian wrote: It appears after some back and forth mail with attresearch (code owner) that the source code used by debian (and ubuntu) are both out of date, they both have this code dump or corruptin bug that was fixed at ksh93u (dixit David Korn). Debian does have ksh93u. Latest version at the following URL is what Debian has: http://www2.research.att.com/~gsf/download/ I think there is a more recent version that is declared a beta or alpha. This said, I wouldn't be surprised if the download link is out-of-date given that the maintainers are leaving ATT. Oliver -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
ksh93u+ is the last stable version, ksh93v- is the alpha currently in
development. I am working on integrating ksh93v-, with major changes,
regarding to making it much more stable on Debian, and to enable the
POSIX builtins, which are mostly missing in Debian (compared to, like
Suse).
Olga
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Oliver Kiddle okid...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Phi Debian wrote:
It appears after some back and forth mail with attresearch (code
owner) that the source code used by debian (and ubuntu) are both out
of date, they both have this code dump or corruptin bug that was fixed
at ksh93u (dixit David Korn).
Debian does have ksh93u. Latest version at the following URL is what
Debian has:
http://www2.research.att.com/~gsf/download/
I think there is a more recent version that is declared a beta or alpha.
This said, I wouldn't be surprised if the download link is out-of-date
given that the maintainers are leaving ATT.
Oliver
--
, __ ,
{ \/`o;-Olga Kryzhanovska -;o`\/ }
.'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanov...@gmail.com \-`\-'.
`'-..-| / http://twitter.com/fleyta \ |-..-'`
/\/\ Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer /\/\
`--` `--`
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Oliver Kiddle okid...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Debian does have ksh93u. Ambiguous Latest version at the following URL is what Debian has: http://www2.research.att.com/~gsf/download/ This link shows 3 ksh93u versions I think there is a more recent version that is declared a beta or alpha. This said, I wouldn't be surprised if the download link is out-of-date given that the maintainers are leaving ATT. Oliver No the link are accurate, and as Olga said, what is beta is ksh98v The story goes like this Version JM 93u+ 2012-02-29 Is bugged (core dump on ##) Version AJM 93u+ 2012-06-28 Is correct (regarding ##) Version AJM 93u+ 2012-08-01 is correct *regarding ##) Debian binary ksh package for wheezy gets Version JM 93u+ 2012-02-29 and match the source code we got with apt-get source ksh Bottom line, you rigth, debian has the ksh93u+ but the only wrong one. Suse got a ksh93+ as well but a good one. I think wheezy deserve a clean ksh93, and should be patched, without waitng for next ksh93v Hope this helps Cheers, Phi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
Phi Debian wrote: On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Oliver Kiddle okid...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Debian does have ksh93u. Ambiguous Clearly we've got ambiguity in Debian versions of ksh too: wheezy does have 2012-02-29, testing/unstable have 2012-08-01. 2012-08-01 will never go into wheezy, the best we can do is patch (or wait for jessie to be stable). As Olga is taking over ksh, you'll have to persuade her to roll a 93u+-1.3 for wheezy. What apt-get source gives you depends on how your debian installation is configured. Frustratingly, I tried very hard to have 2012-08-01 pushed into wheezy during the freeze but the lack of a sponsor combined with strict application of Debian policy meant that wheezy ended up with a patched up 2012-02-29. Oliver -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
What is the way to replace the patched up 2012-02-29? Find sponsor,
declare him how bad it is?
Olga
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Oliver Kiddle okid...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Phi Debian wrote:
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Oliver Kiddle okid...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Debian does have ksh93u.
Ambiguous
Clearly we've got ambiguity in Debian versions of ksh too:
wheezy does have 2012-02-29, testing/unstable have 2012-08-01. 2012-08-01 will
never go into wheezy, the best we can do is patch (or wait for jessie to be
stable). As Olga is taking over ksh, you'll have to persuade her to roll a
93u+-1.3 for wheezy.
What apt-get source gives you depends on how your debian installation is
configured.
Frustratingly, I tried very hard to have 2012-08-01 pushed into wheezy during
the freeze but the lack of a sponsor combined with strict application of
Debian
policy meant that wheezy ended up with a patched up 2012-02-29.
Oliver
--
, __ ,
{ \/`o;-Olga Kryzhanovska -;o`\/ }
.'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanov...@gmail.com \-`\-'.
`'-..-| / http://twitter.com/fleyta \ |-..-'`
/\/\ Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer /\/\
`--` `--`
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
ольга крыжановская wrote: What is the way to replace the patched up 2012-02-29? Find sponsor, declare him how bad it is? I think so. One thought is that you could try to pester Jonathan Wiltshire j...@debian.org: he did 93u+-1.2. It is probably wise to prepare the replacement first. Oliver -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
I did produce a patch, and posted it. The patch implement the exact same code as the one later given by the code owner, i.e init a local with 0. So now if wheezy is frozen, it can still be patched, the current source version you got with wheezy actually contain already 5 patch, plus mine it goes to 6 (mine called fix-coredump-memcorrupt-pond-1st-char.patch ) CY51$ pwd /home/phi/ksh-93u+/debian/patches CY51$ ls cleanup-man-title.patch no-rpath.patch fix-cd-builtin.patch series fix-coredump-memcorrupt-pond-1st-char.patch shell-options.patch handle-removed-working-dir.patch So wheezy as proven it could handle patches, let's add one more. This is in the case it is easier to patch vs enter a band new version. Cheers, Phi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
Hi All, It appears after some back and forth mail with attresearch (code owner) that the source code used by debian (and ubuntu) are both out of date, they both have this code dump or corruptin bug that was fixed at ksh93u (dixit David Korn). I dunno what ksh93u debian grabed but for sure it is buged. So what is the process to get a more recent source code on debian (at least wheezy) and then an updated binary package. Where should we wave ? Thanx in advance, Cheers, Phi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
Hi All, This patch fix the ksh core dump or random memory corruption seen when typing ## (or more generally #some chars) The original code was missing a var initialisation, later teh code firex a nullderef still missing the var initialisation. This fix do both the var init, and the null deref avoidance. ksh-debdiff Description: Binary data
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
On 7 October 2013 09:38, Phi Debian phi.deb...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, This patch fix the ksh core dump or random memory corruption seen when typing ## (or more generally #some chars) The original code was missing a var initialisation, later teh code firex a nullderef still missing the var initialisation. This fix do both the var init, and the null deref avoidance. Could you ask ольга крыжановская olga.kryzhanov...@gmail.com, please? She's taking over the development and maintainership for the Debian ksh93 package (likely the most qualified to do so since she was one of the two main developers of the ksh93-as-/bin/sh-work in Solaris 11). Ced -- Cedric Blancher cedric.blanc...@gmail.com Institute Pasteur -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
On 4 Oct, you wrote: How should I proceed for a patch submit, I did provide it to att owner, so I guess future release will have the fix, but for debian should I do something, does debian has its own set of 'fixes' (I am ignorant here) You an include a small patch in an e-mail to this bug report. Then if someone wants to adjust the package to incorporate the patch then they can do so. Otherwise, it'll reach Debian along with the new upstream release. Thanks Oliver -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#720441: Got a fix, how to submit patch.
Hi All, Please ignore my prev mail with my professional email, my spam killer reject external mail. How should I proceed for a patch submit, I did provide it to att owner, so I guess future release will have the fix, but for debian should I do something, does debian has its own set of 'fixes' (I am ignorant here) Cheers, Phi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
