home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!spool.mu.edu!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!uknet!yorkohm!nigelm
- From: nigelm@ohm.york.ac.uk (Nigel Metheringham)
- Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
- Subject: Re: Segment Violation signal! (INOFFICIAL FIX)
- Message-ID: <1993Jan8.152815.12187@ohm.york.ac.uk>
- Date: 8 Jan 93 15:28:15 GMT
- References: <1993Jan6.164245.20045@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> <1if9mqINNd43@gossip.pyramid.com> <1993Jan7.115948.14710@isa.de>
- Organization: Electronics Department, University of York, UK
- Lines: 28
-
- In <1993Jan7.115948.14710@isa.de> vogt@isa.de (Gerald Vogt) writes:
- >Hi. All those who upgraded elm to patchlevel 20 and get a Segment
- >Violation, Bus Error or similar signal when leaving elm with 'x' may
- >apply the following patch to the file src/exitprog.c. Everything
- >should work afterwards. But be aware: DON'T FORGET TO REMOVE THE PATCH
- >AGAIN BEFORE YOU APPLY THE NEXT OFFICIAL PATCHES!!!
-
- If you have stock elm 2.4PL20 and you can use x without some form of
- segment violation/bus error after having changed the status of a
- message (ie read an unread one or deleted a message), then I'd be a
- touch worried.
-
- Whats happening is that an unitialised pointer is being passed to a
- sprintf type function. On my system that pointer is auto intialised
- to zero, but on other systems you will be tramping over some random
- data space. Fortunately since its the last thing you do before
- shutting down you will probably get away with it!
-
- I passed a patch to Syd a couple of days ago. I expect him to issue
- a blessed patch fairly soon (it is a real bug so needs fixing fairly
- fast).
-
- Nigel.
-
- --
- # Nigel Metheringham -- (NeXT) EMail: nigelm@ohm.york.ac.uk #
- # System Administrator, Electronics Dept, University of York #
- # York YO1 5DD. Phone: +44 904 432374, Fax: +44 904 432335 #
-