Re: [Gimp-developer] List of changes for the future 1.2.4 release
On 20 Dec 2002, Sven Neumann wrote: > Hi, > > Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Note that just checking write() or fwrite() return values may not be > > > enough: some filesystems delay the error indictation until close() is > > > called on the fd. So this bug may well be influenced by the filesystem > > > GIMP is writing to at the time. > > > > Yes, this is very important! Checking only the return value of fwrite() > > and ignoring the return value of close() is a recipe for disaster. You > > should also bear in mind that some filesystems (even the good old ext2) > > may behave differently if quotas are enabled. > > please reopen the bug-report then. No need; we check fclose()'s return value in both branches now. Rockwalrus ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] List of changes for the future 1.2.4 release
Hi, Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Note that just checking write() or fwrite() return values may not be > > enough: some filesystems delay the error indictation until close() is > > called on the fd. So this bug may well be influenced by the filesystem > > GIMP is writing to at the time. > > Yes, this is very important! Checking only the return value of fwrite() > and ignoring the return value of close() is a recipe for disaster. You > should also bear in mind that some filesystems (even the good old ext2) > may behave differently if quotas are enabled. please reopen the bug-report then. Salut, Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] List of changes for the future 1.2.4 release
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:45:19 -, "Austin Donnelly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [quoting Rockwalrus, who quoted Sven:] > > Saving .xcf on full filesystem hangs GIMP > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101340 [...] > Note that just checking write() or fwrite() return values may not be > enough: some filesystems delay the error indictation until close() is > called on the fd. So this bug may well be influenced by the filesystem > GIMP is writing to at the time. Yes, this is very important! Checking only the return value of fwrite() and ignoring the return value of close() is a recipe for disaster. You should also bear in mind that some filesystems (even the good old ext2) may behave differently if quotas are enabled. I do most of my GIMP work over NFS, and many NFS filesystem checks are delayed until the call to close(). I also enable quotas for myself and all other users on most of the machines that I manage. So testing the return value of fwrite() and ignoring the close() would only shift the problem described in bug #101340: instead of locking the GIMP, the user would lose the image without getting any error message. I don't know which problem is worse... -Raphaël ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
RE: [Gimp-developer] List of changes for the future 1.2.4 release
> Saving .xcf on full filesystem hangs GIMP > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101340 > > doesn't seem overly complicated since there's only one call to fwrite() > in app/xcf.c which needs to have its return_value to be checked. The > larger part of the problem is to propate the error up from > xcf_write_int8(). Note that just checking write() or fwrite() return values may not be enough: some filesystems delay the error indictation until close() is called on the fd. So this bug may well be influenced by the filesystem GIMP is writing to at the time. Just a detail to bear in mind... Austin ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] List of changes for the future 1.2.4 release
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:12:21 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmFwaGHrbA==?= Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> With the release of 1.2.4-pre2, we are getting closer to the final 1.2.4. Like I did a few months ago when 1.2.3 was released, I searched Bugzilla and the various ChangeLog files in order to get a list of significant changes between the future 1.2.4 release and the previous version. Here are the changes that I identified so far. There are many other things mentioned in the ChangeLog, but I think that these are the most significant ones. I am even thinking about deleting the last two or three items because the list is already a bit long. * The print plug-in is now using libgimpprint-4.2, which is distributed as a separate package (bug #80941). It is more stable and more portable than previous versions (bug #87428). If you do not have libgimpprint on your system, you have to download it from http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/ and install it before building The GIMP, else use --disable-print. I guess this means that we (Gimp-print) should start figuring out how to factor this out of our distribution. On another note, someone's working on a more generalized printing GUI based on the Print plugin code. This may not make it into 4.2, but if it does the result will be that there will be a libgimpprintui, and the Print plugin will shrink rather dramatically in code volume. From an operational standpoint, it would most likely share settings with any other application that used this library. -- Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project lead for Gimp Print --http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] List of changes for the future 1.2.4 release
On 18 Dec 2002, Sven Neumann wrote: > Hi, > > Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I'd also like to see this one being addressed: > > Saving .xcf on full filesystem hangs GIMP > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101340 > > doesn't seem overly complicated since there's only one call to fwrite() > in app/xcf.c which needs to have its return_value to be checked. The > larger part of the problem is to propate the error up from xcf_write_int8(). > Volunteers for this one? I'll volunteer. I've lost a lot of work to this bug. Rockwalrus ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] List of changes for the future 1.2.4 release
Hi, Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > With the release of 1.2.4-pre2, we are getting closer to the final > 1.2.4. Like I did a few months ago when 1.2.3 was released, I > searched Bugzilla and the various ChangeLog files in order to get a > list of significant changes between the future 1.2.4 release and the > previous version. thanks, great work! > I am posting this now, just in case someone would have the foolish > idea of releasing 1.2.4 while I am away during the X-Mas break... On > the other hand, bug #83362 is still open and makes it illegal to > distribute 1.2.4 as it is. Are there any volunteers to solve this > problem? I'd also like to see this one being addressed: Saving .xcf on full filesystem hangs GIMP http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101340 doesn't seem overly complicated since there's only one call to fwrite() in app/xcf.c which needs to have its return_value to be checked. The larger part of the problem is to propate the error up from xcf_write_int8(). Volunteers for this one? Salut, Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
