Re: [wmii] Segfault when chmod on mounted wmii
The wmii segfault I mentioned was indeed recorded in dmesg as wmii segfaulting. I didn't see anything extra in the terminal before wmii (and X) dumped me back to the command line as you did so perhaps I was experiencing a different issue caused by a similar problem. Since updating to tip fixed it though I'll leave it at that. Thomas On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 04:36:57PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: > Kris Maglione wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: >> >>> I was just messing around. But generally things should segfault, right? >>> I only brought it up here because it's a seg fault and not a normal >>> error. >>> >> >> Well, no, they shouldn't segfault, but that has nothing to do with wmii. >> Presumably you're using GNU chmod, which seems to be what seg faulted. >> >> > Oh, I see what you mean. The segfault output is indicative of chmod > segfaulting, so maybe wmii didn't segfault but simply crashed. I took it > for granted since it quickly appeared and then wmii dies, killing my X > session. I certainly don't see the permission denied error as Thomas does. > I'll try tip. >
Re: [wmii] Segfault when chmod on mounted wmii
Kris Maglione wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: I was just messing around. But generally things should segfault, right? I only brought it up here because it's a seg fault and not a normal error. Well, no, they shouldn't segfault, but that has nothing to do with wmii. Presumably you're using GNU chmod, which seems to be what seg faulted. Oh, I see what you mean. The segfault output is indicative of chmod segfaulting, so maybe wmii didn't segfault but simply crashed. I took it for granted since it quickly appeared and then wmii dies, killing my X session. I certainly don't see the permission denied error as Thomas does. I'll try tip.
Re: [wmii] Segfault when chmod on mounted wmii
Great. And yes, this was a wmii segfault, not a chmod segfault. wmii crashes on my box. Thanks guys. Thomas Gallen wrote: Unfortunately Wmii 2 or 3 revisions back didn't respond so gracefully to chmod and segfaults (...and I made the poor judgement of finding this out at work. :( Ouch.) However, as of the current tip, it's fine and just presents me with a permission denied error. If the parent poster is using the current tip then I'm sorry to say I wasn't able to duplicate this one. Thomas On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:10:19PM -0400, Kris Maglione wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: I was just messing around. But generally things should segfault, right? I only brought it up here because it's a seg fault and not a normal error. Well, no, they shouldn't segfault, but that has nothing to do with wmii. Presumably you're using GNU chmod, which seems to be what seg faulted. -- Kris Maglione Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. --Albert Einstein
Re: [wmii] Segfault when chmod on mounted wmii
Unfortunately Wmii 2 or 3 revisions back didn't respond so gracefully to chmod and segfaults (...and I made the poor judgement of finding this out at work. :( Ouch.) However, as of the current tip, it's fine and just presents me with a permission denied error. If the parent poster is using the current tip then I'm sorry to say I wasn't able to duplicate this one. Thomas On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:10:19PM -0400, Kris Maglione wrote: > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: >> I was just messing around. But generally things should segfault, right? >> I only brought it up here because it's a seg fault and not a normal error. > > Well, no, they shouldn't segfault, but that has nothing to do with wmii. > Presumably you're using GNU chmod, which seems to be what seg faulted. > > -- > Kris Maglione > > Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. > --Albert Einstein > >
Re: [wmii] Segfault when chmod on mounted wmii
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: I was just messing around. But generally things should segfault, right? I only brought it up here because it's a seg fault and not a normal error. Well, no, they shouldn't segfault, but that has nothing to do with wmii. Presumably you're using GNU chmod, which seems to be what seg faulted. -- Kris Maglione Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. --Albert Einstein
Re: [wmii] Segfault when chmod on mounted wmii
Kris Maglione wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 02:33:18PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: [14:31:47] rcors...@lemmy ~ $ chmod g+r wmii Segmentation Fault Is this any better in a newer version, or am I stuck with only user perms? Virtual filesystems like wmii's usually don't allow permission changing. Why do you need group or world perms? I was just messing around. But generally things should segfault, right? I only brought it up here because it's a seg fault and not a normal error.
Re: [wmii] Segfault when chmod on mounted wmii
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 02:33:18PM -0400, Robert C Corsaro wrote: [14:31:47] rcors...@lemmy ~ $ chmod g+r wmii Segmentation Fault Is this any better in a newer version, or am I stuck with only user perms? Virtual filesystems like wmii's usually don't allow permission changing. Why do you need group or world perms? -- Kris Maglione For a long time it puzzled me how something so expensive, so leading edge, could be so useless, and then it occurred to me that a computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. --Bill Bryson
