Re: bug#7489: [coreutils] over aggressive threads in sort

2010-12-07 Thread Jim Meyering
Chen Guo wrote: ... I've attached the patch (inlined at the bottom). Here's the GDB crash, with backtrace. I also printed node-queued in GDB, so it's evident that its accessible. (gdb) run --parallel 2 rec_1M /dev/null Starting program: /data/chen/Coding/Coreutils/test/sort-mutex

Re: bug#7489: [coreutils] over aggressive threads in sort

2010-12-07 Thread Jim Meyering
Chen Guo wrote: Hi Professor Eggert, On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Paul Eggert egg...@cs.ucla.edu wrote: On 12/05/2010 09:16 PM, Chen Guo wrote: Before saying anything else, I should note that for mutexes, on 4 threads 20% of the time there's a segfault on a seemingly innocuous line in

Re: bug#7489: [coreutils] over aggressive threads in sort

2010-12-07 Thread Chen Guo
Hi Jim, On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Jim Meyering j...@meyering.net wrote: Hi Chen, Thanks.  What does your input file look like? I've been unable to reproduce the failure using the output of seq 100.  I've tried a few different -S ... options, in case the amount of available memory

bug#7574: [PATCH]: echo, printf, stat: Allow only up to 8 bit octal input for backslash-escaped chars

2010-12-07 Thread Ondrej Vasik
Paul Eggert wrote: As a minor point, both uses like this: '4' = *p *p = '7' can be replaced with something like this: '4' = *p ... The replacements are not only shorter, but easier to understand, because otherwise the reader is left wondering why that unnecessary comparison to

bug#7489: [coreutils] over aggressive threads in sort

2010-12-07 Thread Jim Meyering
Chen Guo wrote: ... I've attached the patch (inlined at the bottom). Here's the GDB crash, with backtrace. I also printed node-queued in GDB, so it's evident that its accessible. (gdb) run --parallel 2 rec_1M /dev/null Starting program: /data/chen/Coding/Coreutils/test/sort-mutex

bug#7574: [PATCH]: echo, printf, stat: Allow only up to 8 bit octal input for backslash-escaped chars

2010-12-07 Thread Pádraig Brady
There is an extraneous \n in the NEWS. Also I'd rephrase: +(if @var{ooo} is 1 to 3 octal digits byte value) specifying a character +to print, and @samp...@var{hh}} as a hexadecimal number (if @var{hh} is +1 to 2 hex digits) specifying a character to print. as: (if @var{ooo} is 1 to 3 octal

bug#7574: [PATCH]: echo, printf, stat: Allow only up to 8 bit octal input for backslash-escaped chars

2010-12-07 Thread Ondrej Vasik
Pádraig Brady píše v Út 07. 12. 2010 v 09:48 +: There is an extraneous \n in the NEWS. Also I'd rephrase: +(if @var{ooo} is 1 to 3 octal digits byte value) specifying a character +to print, and @samp...@var{hh}} as a hexadecimal number (if @var{hh} is +1 to 2 hex digits) specifying a

bug#7577: non-ascii char in manpage

2010-12-07 Thread Eric Blake
On 12/07/2010 02:30 AM, tse...@bsdmail.com wrote: Hi there, reading through the man page for date, I found this two that look like a typo, (â) I guess I could be wrong, but: %xlocaleâs date representation (e.g., 12/31/99) %X localeâs time representation (e.g., 23:13:48) Thanks