Can someone review this? [Fwd: Re: ports/122975: [PATCH] Fix for mail/thunderbird SIGFPE crash on FreeBSD/amd64]

Jeremy Messenger mezz7 at cox.net
Tue Apr 22 16:33:18 UTC 2008


On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 02:19:57 -0500, Xin LI <delphij at delphij.net> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jeremy Messenger wrote:
> | On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:17:35 -0500, Joe Marcus Clarke
> | <marcus at marcuscom.com> wrote:
> |
> |> On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 21:43 -0700, Xin LI wrote:
> | ATT.  This fixes a very nasty issue which prevents me from being able  
> to
> | use enigmime-thunderbird.
> |>>
> |>> Approved.
> |
> |> Do other gecko ports need same change in Double.cpp?
> |
> |> # find /usr/ports -name patch-Double.cpp
> |> /usr/ports/mail/lightning/files/patch-Double.cpp
> |> /usr/ports/mail/thunderbird/files/patch-Double.cpp
> |> /usr/ports/www/firefox/files/patch-Double.cpp
> |> /usr/ports/www/firefox15/files/patch-Double.cpp
> |> /usr/ports/www/flock/files/patch-Double.cpp
> |> /usr/ports/www/mozilla/files/patch-Double.cpp
>
> I think so but we really need to check it in a case-by-case basis (I can
> do this when I have some spare time, but will really appreciate if
> someone who uses these everyday to provide a hand :).  To make a long
> story short, it seems that the floating number implementation of the
> javascript engine uses some hackish magic which will raise upperflow
> exception on, at least, FreeBSD/i386 and amd64.

Javascript... That remind me a PR that I have closed a few days ago,  
because he has failed to provide the details by follow in our bug report  
page. A lot of others (amd64 users) can't reproduce his problem.

http://www.freebsd.org/gnome/docs/bugging.html (it asked for backtraces  
too)

The PR is ports/121951:

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=121951

It made me wondering that it's possible that it has to do same thing in  
here? Some of us don't have amd64, which I think it's about two people  
that have amd64 (marcus and pav) in team. I personal think it's safe to  
put in all other gecko ports the same change since most of gecko ports  
have same patches. I can edit these ports if it's ok with you guys.

Cheers,
Mezz

> Cheers,
> - --
> Xin LI <delphij at delphij.net>	http://www.delphij.net/
> FreeBSD - The Power to Serve!
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.8 (FreeBSD)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkgNkZ0ACgkQi+vbBBjt66Bz2wCbBPnWmFuVBR8huG+QchDtCq58
> T6oAoKALA0MePIlN5PSFMLc4hGevxpnM
> =GATO
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
mezz7 at cox.net  -  mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/  -  gnome at FreeBSD.org


More information about the freebsd-gnome mailing list