On Mar 18, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Felix wrote:
> From: Jim Ursetto
>
>> Here's a full patch to avoid context switches screwing up the error message
>> reported to the user, and also consolidates much of the error handling.
> Applied. Thanks.
Argh! I made an error in the patch. I've attached the u
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:05:46PM +0100, Felix wrote:
> I disagree. We can still try to make the core system practical,
> instead of a mindless API server for low-level facilities wrapped in
> s-expression syntax.
Nobody's arguing for that. Abstraction (the right kind!) is what makes
Scheme so p
Hello!
The symbolgc-test was failing for me again. As this test is somewhat
nasty and since I can't provide a fix, I have modified runtests.sh to
continue, regardless of the exit-status of the symbolgc-test program.
cheers,
felix
___
Chicken-hackers m
From: Jim Ursetto
Subject: [PATCH] Avoid context switch during TCP errno reporting
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 14:06:03 -0500
> Here's a full patch to avoid context switches screwing up the error message
> reported to the user, and also consolidates much of the error handling.
>
> I think this patch
From: Mario Domenech Goulart
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 3/4] Remove ##sys#expand-home-path.
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 13:02:01 -0400
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 08:45:17 -0700 Matt Welland wrote:
>
>> Please please keep the expansion of ~.
>> Pragmatically speaking what is at r
>
> Note that you need to know that `absolute-pathname?' does not expand ~.
No, it doesn't because it is not a file-system operation. It is a string
operation.
cheers,
felix
___
Chicken-hackers mailing list
Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
https://lists.
From: Peter Bex
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 3/4] Remove ##sys#expand-home-path.
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 21:22:12 +0100
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 02:03:41PM -0400, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
>> Maybe I'm too paranoid? Or missing something?
>
> No, you're spot on. I think given a cho
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 02:03:41PM -0400, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
> Maybe I'm too paranoid? Or missing something?
No, you're spot on. I think given a choice, we should always err on
the side of security and adhere to the Principle Of Least Astonishment.
For convenient scripting, a "dwim"
Hi John,
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 16:01:24 -0400 John Cowan wrote:
> Mario Domenech Goulart scripsit:
>
>> $ mkdir '~'
>
> While this is certainly Posix-legal, my opinion is that anyone who does
> it deserves to lose.
Indeed, but the actual point is that a malicious user can create such a
director
Mario Domenech Goulart scripsit:
> $ mkdir '~'
While this is certainly Posix-legal, my opinion is that anyone who does
it deserves to lose. In the Real World, Posix systems often have portions
of the filesystem that are not fully Posix-compliant.
--
In politics, obedience and support Jo
On Mar 18, 2013, at 2:06 PM, Jim Ursetto wrote:
> I think this patch is sufficient because the only actual issue, as I
> understand
> it, is that under high load you will occasionally get an incorrect error
> message
> (typically, "operation in progress") instead of the real error message;
> an
Here's a full patch to avoid context switches screwing up the error message
reported to the user, and also consolidates much of the error handling.
I think this patch is sufficient because the only actual issue, as I understand
it, is that under high load you will occasionally get an incorrect err
Hi,
> If we keep the ~-expansion, any safe code that use the filesystem API
> will have to resort to tricks like
>
> (operation (if (absolute-pathname? the-path)
> the-path
> (make-pathname (current-directory) the-path)))
>
> to guard against input that would
Hi Felix,
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:25:02 -0400 (EDT) Felix
wrote:
> From: Mario Domenech Goulart
> Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 3/4] Remove ##sys#expand-home-path.
> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:33:49 -0400
>
>>
>> Making robust software in shell scripting languages is hard, and one of
>>
Hi Matt,
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 08:45:17 -0700 Matt Welland wrote:
> Please please keep the expansion of ~.
> Pragmatically speaking what is at risk?
Here's a simple example:
$ mkdir some-dir
$ cd some-dir/
$ mkdir '~'
$ echo data > '~/some-file'
$ echo 'very important data' > ~/some-
On Mar 18, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Felix wrote:
> From: Jim Ursetto
> Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] non-termination with (declare (inline
> ...))
> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:57:49 -0500
>
>> Is that just for declare or does it also apply to define-inline?
>
> No, "define-inline" uses a com
From: Jim Ursetto
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] non-termination with (declare (inline
...))
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:57:49 -0500
> Is that just for declare or does it also apply to define-inline?
No, "define-inline" uses a completely different mechanism. It is
effectively a different
On Mar 18, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
> [Jim wrote:]
>> I was hoping you would just confirm you are experiencing the same problem
>> before I spend more time on it.
>
> So, you want me to verify that your patch does not help? I am slightly
> confused ...
Sorry, that sentence was a
Is that just for declare or does it also apply to define-inline?
Jim
On Mar 17, 2013, at 5:31 PM, Felix wrote:
> The attached patch changes the "inline" declaration, when used with an
> identifier, to merely mark that identifier as potentially inlinable by
> effectively giving it "local" semantic
From: Mario Domenech Goulart
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 3/4] Remove ##sys#expand-home-path.
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:33:49 -0400
>
> Making robust software in shell scripting languages is hard, and one of
> the reasons it is hard is that shells perform a lot of "convenient"
> operati
Please please keep the expansion of ~.
Pragmatically speaking what is at risk?
Original message
From: Felix
Date: 03/18/2013 8:25 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: mario.goul...@gmail.com
Cc: chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 3/4] Remove ##sys#expand-h
From: John Cowan
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] non-termination with (declare (inline
...))
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 18:41:10 -0400
> Felix scripsit:
>
>> This leaves the decision to inline to the compiler
>
> Excellent. However, I hope that "notinline" forces the compiler never
> to in
From: Florian Zumbiehl
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH 1/2] tcp: disable interrupts
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:50:46 +0100
> Hi,
>
>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 1:58 AM, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
>>
>> > If you cannot be sufficiently sure
>> > that your approach is correct to be willing to build a
Hi,
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 14:30:13 + Alaric Snell-Pym
wrote:
> On 03/16/2013 05:18 PM, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
>>
>>> having a "clean file-system API", whatever that means.
>>
>> I think primarily that you can read a directory and use the filenames you
>> get back for opening the files in tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/16/2013 05:18 PM, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> having a "clean file-system API", whatever that means.
>
> I think primarily that you can read a directory and use the filenames you
> get back for opening the files in that directory rather th
Hi,
> On Mar 17, 2013, at 1:58 AM, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
>
> > If you cannot be sufficiently sure
> > that your approach is correct to be willing to build a full fix on it
> > without testing first, I would consider that a sign that the approach is
> > too fragile to rely on, at least without
26 matches
Mail list logo
