Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: Feature request: ZSH_XTRACEFD variable
- X-seq: zsh-workers 45776
- From: Peter Stephenson <p.w.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Feature request: ZSH_XTRACEFD variable
- Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 09:26:32 +0100 (BST)
- Importance: Medium
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <EL9xNuAdKSLWp41th3XxhRLVtul7jHkT9ons2s2c_35aNjCbCMzo4DqiCNV1SoNjdLhNgdUGLNMHQxQ9q4jDMcNIsxzonWx5jzOB5Hr8rBsemail@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <CGME20190721150914epcas1p18b5b4b9ccc4e593e854b076a835257c7@epcas1p1.samsung.com> <CAD8ZDTrfrWTKfa1efTo63uk1XJO4BOp5hSLOfjL1tXkeDMf_QQ@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAD8ZDTokqOTfEajquX2SKU5pLWgd85sPdRMYkxE4nF0pQhi+BA@mail.gmail.com> <email@example.com> <CAD8ZDTotCLBANtzppSbCcgKyLhkXaVWysjqv99xS6bnLypBViA@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAD8ZDTp=rYsWiEkq3byjU=BRAA2iLwxt5QG_19MBc+Jo8dCemail@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
> On 03 May 2020 at 22:23 Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Peter Stephenson wrote on Sun, 03 May 2020 18:30 +0100:
> > On Sat, 2020-05-02 at 20:02 +0200, Timothée Mazzucotelli wrote:
> > > I wrote such a test and noticed that file descriptors were being
> > > closed each time ZSH_XTRACEFD was (re)assigned, even as a local
> > > variable. So I removed the code lines closing the previous file
> > > descriptor in xtracefdsetfn, and it seemed to work well.
> > This re-introduces the file descriptor leak I was at pains to remove.
> > It apparently works because the test isn't sensitive to the leak ---
> > that's hard to fix in a standard way, i.e. with1out having some limit you
> > can rely on on file descriptors being created.
> Which test is that?
I'm thinking of 45760, but actually it's explicitly testing for closed file
descriptors (rather than looking for a leak), so that should be on the
right lines. I'll look a bit more closely to check what's going on when
I get a chance --- I'm evidently missing aspects of how this fits together
Messages sorted by: