"Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montez...@gmail.com> writes:

> Thaks for the analysis and the patch.  I'm a bit busy but will try to
> take a deeper look soonish.

I know how that goes. ;-)

> On a first glance, using the module operator rather than bitwise
> operations looks a bit odd.

It's unconventional, but should optimize to bitwise masking in practice
because the modulus is a constant power of two.  Using an explicit mask
would be cleaner, but AFAICT apt's headers don't predefine one.

> Also, the code is from before 2005 (the beginning of the VCS history) so
> it's a bit strange that it survived all these years if it produces
> crashes, but then again maybe the wrong behaviour it's caused by more
> recent changes to support multiarch, or changes in apt, etc.

Right, I presume the flags that are causing trouble are relatively new
additions to apt.

FWIW, my patched aptitude has continued to work well for me with no
further changes.

At any rate, thanks for looking into my report!

-- 
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ | http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/?a...@monk.mit.edu

_______________________________________________
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

Reply via email to