> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Wed Aug 31 06:01:12 2005]:
>
> Summary: already fixed by patch 24523.
>
> On 2005–08–31, at 10:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (via RT) wrote:
>
> > -- CODE BEGINS HERE --
> > #!/usr/bin/perl
> > use strict;
> > sub s { open $X, my $Y, r; }
> > -- CODE ENDS HERE --
> > [crashes on 5.8.x, 5.9.1]
>
> FWIW, I see the crash (on Darwin) with 5.8.1-7 (omitting 5.8.2, which
> I don't have lying around) and 5.9.2, but not with [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Stack trace for the crashed perls is like
>
> Thread 0 Crashed:
> 0 perl 0x0002893c Perl_ck_open + 452 (op.c:5835)
> 1 perl 0x00017624 Perl_convert + 452 (op.c:2131)
> 2 perl 0x001adc60 Perl_yyparse + 8252 (perly.y:427)
> 3 perl 0x00033018 S_parse_body + 6184 (perl.c:1733)
> 4 perl 0x000315a4 perl_parse + 1780 (perl.c:1203)
> 5 perl 0x000028b8 main + 308 (perlmain.c:97)
> 6 perl 0x00001fe0 _start + 344 (crt.c:272)
> 7 perl 0x00001e84 start + 60
>
> (That happens to be 5.9.2; others are similar.)
>
> A sniff of the blame log shows that patch 24523 did a little consting
> in that area. Reverting the changed lines in bleadperl brings the
> crash back. So consting fixed a bug that hadn't even been reported!
>
> Does consting stuff like this get rolled into the various maints as a
> matter of course?
>
This seems to go a bit deeper. My current bleadperl works fine on
OpenBSD, but segfaults on Linux. I'll have to play with the
configurations to see what the backtrace from Linux will show me now.
