On 03/24/2016 03:09 PM, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:15:38 -0400 Eric McCorkle said:
>
>> Ok, I cracked it.
>>
>> modules/cpufreq/e_mod_main.c
>>
>> In _cpufreq_face_update_available
>>
>> If count is 0, then you get an integer underflow and end up passing a
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:15:38 -0400 Eric McCorkle said:
> Ok, I cracked it.
>
> modules/cpufreq/e_mod_main.c
>
> In _cpufreq_face_update_available
>
> If count is 0, then you get an integer underflow and end up passing a huge
> number to malloc. The code probably ought to check for 0 and do n
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:15:38 -0400 Eric McCorkle said:
reading that code... the cpufreq module has ZERO frequencies supported then ...
your cpu has no frequencies... how interesting. :)
> Ok, I cracked it.
>
> modules/cpufreq/e_mod_main.c
>
> In _cpufreq_face_update_available
>
> If count is
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 00:37:11 -0400 Eric McCorkle said:
> I actually got a good clue from the gdb suggestion. Stack trace looks like
> this (typing on a phone):
>
> e_modapi_save
> e_gadcon_provider_register
> e_gadcon_client_visible
> ecore_idler_del
> ecore_event_current_event_get
> ecore_main
Ok. I've confirmed that my theory was correct, but now I'm seeing the issue
described here: https://phab.enlightenment.org/T3097
I'll record all this on the bug report.
> On Mar 23, 2016, at 19:19, Simon Lees wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 03/24/2016 09:45 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
>> Ok, I cracked it.
On 03/24/2016 09:45 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
> Ok, I cracked it.
>
> modules/cpufreq/e_mod_main.c
>
> In _cpufreq_face_update_available
>
> If count is 0, then you get an integer underflow and end up passing a huge
> number to malloc. The code probably ought to check for 0 and do nothing in
Ok, I cracked it.
modules/cpufreq/e_mod_main.c
In _cpufreq_face_update_available
If count is 0, then you get an integer underflow and end up passing a huge
number to malloc. The code probably ought to check for 0 and do nothing in
that case.
It looks like there is a little suid program tha
Hi,
you can get the bryce settings by ALT+right-click on the bryce, there
you will find a Delete menu entry.
Greetings, bu5hm4n
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:06:44PM +0100, Ingvaldur Sigurjonsson wrote:
> Hi
>
>Curious as I am, I happened to select the 'Desktop->Add Bryce', only
> to find it
Hi
Curious as I am, I happened to select the 'Desktop->Add Bryce', only
to find it taking up space and not being able to remove it!
So, can anyone explain how ?
Regards
- Ingi
--
Transform Data into Opportunity.
To build FreeBSD port with debug symbols:
# make WITH_DEBUG=yes
That's how I proceeded to get detailed backtrace for phab ticket.
Peter
On 03/23/2016 19:16, Eric McCorkle wrote:
> I couldn't seem to track down where the allocation is happening there. I
> also couldn't get the freebsd port b
I couldn't seem to track down where the allocation is happening there. I also
couldn't get the freebsd port build to do debug builds.
I'm going to try good old printf debugging tonight to get to the bottom of it.
On March 23, 2016 11:50:14 AM EDT, Miguel C wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:1
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
> A possible root cause: ZFS allows for noexec and nosuid options on file
> systems. I believe the freebsd installer sets them by default, so if
> you're storing executables in places other than bin/ directories, that
> could be part of the p
A possible root cause: ZFS allows for noexec and nosuid options on file
systems. I believe the freebsd installer sets them by default, so if you're
storing executables in places other than bin/ directories, that could be part
of the problem.
On March 23, 2016 4:21:07 AM EDT, Quelrond wrote:
Hi,
Just to inform you that the issue I've create some weeks ago
https://phab.enlightenment.org/T3097 was observed on a system with ZFS
root too.
Peter
On 03/23/2016 05:42, Miguel C wrote:
> are you using zfs on root? I've seen reports of this issue if using zfs and
> I got the same issue on m
14 matches
Mail list logo
