incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From eric b <>
Subject Re: [CODE] issue 118576: Crash on close
Date Tue, 08 Nov 2011 12:02:15 GMT
Hi Andre,

Le 8 nov. 11 à 11:21, Andre Fischer a écrit :

> On 07.11.2011 12:25, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> I agree with everyone :).
>> Right now it doesnt make sense to spend time on this, however if  
>> Erics patch avoids the crash for now it
>> would be an acceptable solution.
>> I would like a bugzilla issue that we can keep open so that we  
>> dont forget about the underlying issues,
>> maybe 118576 serves that purpose already.
> I agree.
> What is the status of Erics patch?

Pending. See below.

>   Does it work

I'd say yes. No more crash nor alien message on my Windows (XP), and  
on Mac OS X, but I need other feedback, on other OSs too.

Waiting for confirmation.

> and can it be applied under the Apache license?

Honestly : I don't know (and I'm serious): in the case it will be  
commited, the point is to keep Caolan as original other of the good  
idea (use boost shared_ptrs), and to recognize his merit (debug such  
code is difficult and boring).

More precisely : I created the patch manually, because Caolan one did  
not apply. The first reason why, was that LO code and  
seem to be divergent : in LO there is a new added class  and methods  
(Factory) + other deep changes who have been made in cppuhelper, and  
we do not have that in OOo (if I didn't miss anything). Second, some  
cosmetic changes caused some hunks to fail.

I know my patch is very close to Caolan patch, and I don't know what  
we can do with that : in the case we can commit it, we will anyway  
mention Caolan as the orignal autohr of the fix, e.g. providing the  
fdo issue entry (where the initial patch stands) ?

Last but not least, I think my patch does fix the crash, but as you  
wrote (and I completely agree), the WHAT is fixed, but not the WHY.  
That's why I'd prefer use on a more accurate/precise solution (like  
the one you proposed).

Oh, I forgot : another big issue around, is that we can no longer  
extract all the changes made when the new configmanager was added  
(would help to see what is exactly concerned in the code). Or maybe  
is there an existing full diff somewhere ? (was sb111 or something  
like that)


Projet OOo4Kids :
L'association EducOOo :
Blog :

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message