Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: [BUG] some zsh completion fail in some cases if more than 9 jobs

Peter Stephenson wrote:
> Felix Rosencrantz wrote:
> > I reported that I would double the value of MAXJOBS in my builds,
> > which helped me.   Though it might be nice to have a more dynamic solution.
> I've been looking at this.  The big problem is the possibility that
> something in the shell is holding onto a pointer to a job struct when
> you reallocate the job table.  I can get around this when freeing up by
> relegating this to the top level.  However, when we need to expand the
> table we are deep down inside the shell before we have any inkling that
> this is nececessary.
> It looks like we might get a way with it, since the only point where we
> inititialiase a new job is at the top of execpline(), where it's
> benign.  However, I'm not at all sure we can guarantee the state of
> functions lower down the call stack (where the current function is at the
> top) at that point.  This might take a lot of investigation.

I may have been too pessimistic.  The execpline() call is well-protected
anyway (blocking SIGCLD), because in the past we could create jobs
asynchronously (when traps were run directly from the signal handler).
Also, the only extended places where a struct job is used for an
extended period (we usually use the index into the table, which doesn't
change) are in jobs.c and a chunk lower down in execpline(), which is
essentially an extension to the job handling code to be smarter about
signals for jobs running entirely within the shell.  All these are low
level; they don't spawn new jobs.  So maybe it will work.  I'm trying it
locally before posting anything.

Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>                  Software Engineer
CSR Ltd., Science Park, Milton Road,
Cambridge, CB4 0WH, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.


Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author