Has anyone been able to look at this, do I need to make some
changes or do anything else?

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote:

> Although I see the decsriptor.cc part isn't meant to be submitted...
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote:
>> You can use "svn diff" to produce a single patch file that contains both
>> parts of this change.
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Wink Saville <w...@google.com> wrote:
>>> There is a bug in the initialization of the log_silencer_count_mutex_ in
>>> common.cc.
>>> Currently it is initialized because it is a global object, but the order
>>> of initialization
>>> of global objects is undefined in c++ and in my environment it was not
>>> initialized
>>> when some errors were encountered as I was debugging.
>>> If descriptor.cc.patch is applied without applying common.cc.patch the
>>> compilation
>>> fails when the GOOGLE_LOG(ERROR) << "IBGF"; executes because the
>>> log_silencer_count_mutex_ wasn't yet initialized. It so happens that this
>>> actually
>>> fails at build time because the descriptor code is executed during
>>> compiliation.
>>> If you then apply common.cc.patch the compile completes successfully and
>>> make
>>> check also succeeds.
>>> The patch initializes the mutex on first use rather than at
>>> initialization time thus does not
>>> suffer the problem of the current scheme. It does make me wonder if there
>>> maybe other latent bugs in the code associated with assumed
>>> initialization order.
>>> Please review this patch and if additional changes are desired I'll be
>>> glad
>>> to work through any changes.
>>> -- Wink
>>> >>>

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to