The patch, store_phrases.0, applies and compiles cleanly; however, it dumps core;( Here is its gdb:
-8<- gdb htdig htdig.core GNU gdb Copyright 1998 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This GDB was configured as "i386-unknown-bsdi4.3"... Core was generated by `htdig'. Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. Reading symbols from /usr/tmp/htdig/3.2/PG/lib/htdig/libhtnet-3.2.0.so...done. Reading symbols from /usr/tmp/htdig/3.2/PG/lib/htdig/libcommon-3.2.0.so...done. Reading symbols from /usr/tmp/htdig/3.2/PG/lib/htdig/libhtword-3.2.0.so...done. Reading symbols from /usr/tmp/htdig/3.2/PG/lib/htdig_db/libhtdb-3.2.0.so...done. Reading symbols from /usr/tmp/htdig/3.2/PG/lib/htdig/libht-3.2.0.so...done. Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libz.so...done. Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.1...done. Reading symbols from /shlib/libm.so.0.0...done. Reading symbols from /shlib/libgcc.so.1...done. Reading symbols from /shlib/libc.so.2...done. Reading symbols from /shlib/ld-bsdi.so...done. #0 0x4822c936 in String::operator= () from /usr/tmp/htdig/3.2/PG/lib/htdig/libht-3.2.0.so (gdb) bt #0 0x4822c936 in String::operator= () from /usr/tmp/htdig/3.2/PG/lib/htdig/libht-3.2.0.so #1 0x8057a72 in Document::Reset () #2 0x805fcec in Retriever::parse_url () #3 0x805f6c7 in Retriever::Start () #4 0x8069405 in main () #5 0x80574f5 in __start () (gdb) q ->8- On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Gilles Detillieux wrote: > Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:57:36 -0500 (CDT) > From: Gilles Detillieux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: Robert Ribnitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [htdig-dev] Re: Htdig 3.2.0 in Debian Sarge? > > I'm not quite sure about this myself either. I've always been a bit > confused about when Release vs Destroy is appropriate, and I'm not sure > it's always used correctly in the code. My understanding is that Release > is to be used when the individual entries in the table are still supposed > to stick around, e.g. if they're shared with something else. > > In the case of your patch, it doesn't seem quite right to me, because > you delete individual entries before doing a Release() on the whole > dictionary. But the Release() calls release() on each entry, which it > seems has already been deleted. Or, is there some intermediate object, > other than the word_entry, which handles the release() call? It seems > you could just do a Destroy() call at the end, and not do the deletes, and > that would be safest, but it might mean consuming more RAM in the interim. > > According to Lachlan Andrew: > > By the way, that patch was relative to Gilles's recent patch. > > > > Also, I'm not quite sure if I'm cleaning up the Dictionary correctly. > > Could someone check that? > > > > Thanks, > > Lachlan > > > > On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 01:19 pm, Lachlan Andrew wrote: > > > 5. For those who want 3.1.6 functionality with minimal overhead, > > > I suggest the attached patch, which adds a "store_phrases" > > > attribute. If that is false, the DB size is cut to 1/3 by > > > storing only the first occurrence of each word in the text of > > > a document. (Keywords, links etc can still have reduncancy.) > > > -- > Gilles R. Detillieux E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Spinal Cord Research Centre WWW: http://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/ > Dept. Physiology, U. of Manitoba Winnipeg, MB R3E 3J7 (Canada) Joe -- _/ _/_/_/ _/ ____________ __o _/ _/ _/ _/ ______________ _-\<,_ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ ......(_)/ (_) _/_/ oe _/ _/. _/_/ ah [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: The Robotic Monkeys at ThinkGeek For a limited time only, get FREE Ground shipping on all orders of $35 or more. Hurry up and shop folks, this offer expires April 30th! http://www.thinkgeek.com/freeshipping/?cpg=12297 _______________________________________________ ht://Dig Developer mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List information (subscribe/unsubscribe, etc.) https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev
