[coreutils] [PATCH] tests: add test for parallel sort -u segfault bug

2010-12-01 Thread Jim Meyering
I've adjusted this test, and am about to push it along with Paul's patch. It's better to derive the expected output: diff --git a/tests/misc/sort-unique-segv b/tests/misc/sort-unique-segv index 0a1d4cb..55a7414 100755 --- a/tests/misc/sort-unique-segv +++ b/tests/misc/sort-unique-segv @@ -39,15

Re: bug#7489: [coreutils] over aggressive threads in sort

2010-12-01 Thread Jim Meyering
Jim Meyering wrote: Paul Eggert wrote: Could you please try this little patch? It should fix your problem. I came up with this fix in my sleep (literally! I woke up this morning and the patch was in my head), but haven't had time to look at the code in this area to see if it's the best

Re: bug#7489: [coreutils] over aggressive threads in sort

2010-12-01 Thread Jim Meyering
Paul Eggert wrote: On 11/29/2010 08:32 PM, Chen Guo wrote: Hi guys, Is something up with Savannah? I just tried a git clone and got connection time out; I cant even reach git.sv.gnu.org via ping. There was a breakin, which led to leaking of encrypted account passwords, some of them

Re: [coreutils] [PATCH] Cater for extra strace output when building 32-on-64.

2010-12-01 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 30/11/10 18:09, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 02:53:29PM +, Pádraig Brady wrote: [...] --- syscall.c.orig 2010-11-01 14:46:41.292576453 + +++ syscall.c 2010-11-01 14:47:10.164576378 + @@ -953,7 +953,7 @@ call = ptrace(PTRACE_PEEKTEXT,

[coreutils] [PATCH] sort: fix bug on 64-bit hosts with at least 32768 processors

2010-12-01 Thread Paul Eggert
On 11/30/2010 10:16 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: Invoke MAX_MERGE(total, level) with level == 15. 2 level yields 65536, and 65536 * 65536 overflows to zero. I managed to reproduce this bug on a (faked) host with 32768 processors, using a command like this: seq 10 | sort --parallel=32768

bug#7523: chmod example in docs

2010-12-01 Thread Eric Blake
[re-adding the list] On 12/01/2010 09:24 AM, nik...@email.com wrote: Hi Eric, As much as I would love to contribute code to the open source community, unfortunately I have no idea how to code. Even so, your suggestions in English are a good start for telling us what you found to be

bug#7523: chmod example in docs

2010-12-01 Thread Paul Eggert
I've gotta give it to Microsoft, they get their manuals right. Sorry, but I had to laugh at that one. Here's a quote from a Microsoft manual on this very topic: chmod A UNIX command meaning change module. which is bogus, of course: even someone with only passing acquaintance with chmod

bug#7529: Bug#605639: deal better with different filesystem timestamp resolutions

2010-12-01 Thread jidanni
X-Debbugs-cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org, bug-m...@gnu.org Package: coreutils Version: 8.5-1 man cp says: `-u' `--update' Do not copy a non-directory that has an existing destination with the same or newer modification time. If time stamps are being preserved, the comparison is to the

bug#7529: Bug#605639: deal better with different filesystem timestamp resolutions

2010-12-01 Thread Paul Eggert
Good eye! Thanks for the bug report and example. I installed the following one-byte patch into gnulib; please give it a try. It should propagate into coreutils the next time coreutils updates from gnulib. A test case for this would require two file systems, one with finer-grained time stamps

bug#7489: [PATCH] sort: fix bug on 64-bit hosts with at least 32768 processors

2010-12-01 Thread Paul Eggert
On 11/30/2010 10:16 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: Invoke MAX_MERGE(total, level) with level == 15. 2 level yields 65536, and 65536 * 65536 overflows to zero. I managed to reproduce this bug on a (faked) host with 32768 processors, using a command like this: seq 10 | sort --parallel=32768