- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Esteban Lorenzano

he, we made same change... you are going to see a conflict in blessed sources :) El 20/07/2011, a las 11:54a.m., Igor Stasenko escribiÃ³: > I changed the MakeUUID in sqUnixUUID.c to look like following: > > > > int MakeUUID(char *location) > { > uuid_t uuid; > > #if defined(HAVE_UUIDGEN) > uuidgen(&uuid, 1); > #elif defined(HAVE_UUID_GENERATE) > uuid_generate(uuid); > #else > #error "No uuid function provided" > #endif > > memcpy((void *)location, (void *)&uuid, sizeof(uuid)); > return 1; > } > > > and during compiling cocoa vms it fails with error. > And before change the code was looking like following: > > int MakeUUID(char *location) > { > uuid_t uuid; > > #if defined(HAVE_UUIDGEN) > uuidgen(&uuid, 1); > #elif defined(HAVE_UUID_GENERATE) > uuid_generate(uuid); > #endif > > memcpy((void *)location, (void *)&uuid, sizeof(uuid)); > return 1; > } > > which means that if none HAVE_UUIDGEN or HAVE_UUID_GENERATE is > defined, then there is nothing got called > and memcpy then returns a random values on stack, copied from uuid to locaiton. > > And first version of that file just contains : > > > int MakeUUID(char *location) > { > uuid_t uuid; > uuid_generate(uuid); > memcpy((void *)location, (void *)&uuid, sizeof(uuid)); > return 1; > } > > and then changed to: > > #if defined(__NetBSD__) > uuidgen(&uuid, 1); > #else > uuid_generate(uuid); > #endif > > and then changed to: > > #if defined(HAVE_UUIDGEN) > uuidgen(&uuid, 1); > #elif defined(HAVE_UUID_GENERATE) > uuid_generate(uuid); > #endif > > Blame: > Merge Levente's linux UUIDPlugin fix. Fix tickerSleepCycle decl in > heartbeat. Restore -O2 optimization for the interpreter. > > Author: eliot > Date: 5 months ago > Commit: 757297f62c32eaf2af7f26ce66aa6499df776749 > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Casimiro de Almeida Barreto

Em 20-07-2011 11:29, Philippe Marschall escreveu: > On 07/20/2011 03:59 PM, Torsten Bergmann wrote: >> (...) > Did the bug eat your code? Are you a professional developer? If so you must have got stuck in bugs before. MS bugs, Linux bugs, Mac OS bugs, compiler bugs, jdk bugs, library bugs... I have been stuck on bugs. And I can tell you for sure that pharo/squeak communities are extremely responsive. You point a bug and solution comes in hand. I can not tell the same about "commercial software manufacturers" (just try "online support" from the major OS supplier in the market... or file a bug and track how long it takes to be fixed). And remember, contrary to pharo, you have to purchase "visual this or that" in order to use such "marvelous development suite". Even in open source communities: you have a trouble with Linux kernel you fill a report in bugzilla and it takes sometimes years to be closed. So, I can't understand: a) your over reaction b) your insistence in a subject that has proved itself exhausted. By the way, the bug didn't "eat your code". Just put the primitive expression inside double quotes and your code will work all right (supposing it's correct). Regards, CdAB > Cheers > Philippe > > > >

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Igor Stasenko

Btw, Esteban i wonder why you using sqUnixUUID.c in cocoa configs, while MacOS config using sqMacUUID.c which using mac-specific function to generate uuid. See Mac OS/plugins/UUIDPlugin/sqMacUUID.c and apparently don't have the problem with defines. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Igor Stasenko

I changed the MakeUUID in sqUnixUUID.c to look like following: int MakeUUID(char *location) { uuid_t uuid; #if defined(HAVE_UUIDGEN) uuidgen(&uuid, 1); #elif defined(HAVE_UUID_GENERATE) uuid_generate(uuid); #else #error "No uuid function provided" #endif memcpy((void *)location, (void *)&uuid, sizeof(uuid)); return 1; } and during compiling cocoa vms it fails with error. And before change the code was looking like following: int MakeUUID(char *location) { uuid_t uuid; #if defined(HAVE_UUIDGEN) uuidgen(&uuid, 1); #elif defined(HAVE_UUID_GENERATE) uuid_generate(uuid); #endif memcpy((void *)location, (void *)&uuid, sizeof(uuid)); return 1; } which means that if none HAVE_UUIDGEN or HAVE_UUID_GENERATE is defined, then there is nothing got called and memcpy then returns a random values on stack, copied from uuid to locaiton. And first version of that file just contains : int MakeUUID(char *location) { uuid_t uuid; uuid_generate(uuid); memcpy((void *)location, (void *)&uuid, sizeof(uuid)); return 1; } and then changed to: #if defined(__NetBSD__) uuidgen(&uuid, 1); #else uuid_generate(uuid); #endif and then changed to: #if defined(HAVE_UUIDGEN) uuidgen(&uuid, 1); #elif defined(HAVE_UUID_GENERATE) uuid_generate(uuid); #endif Blame: Merge Levente's linux UUIDPlugin fix. Fix tickerSleepCycle decl in heartbeat. Restore -O2 optimization for the interpreter. Author: eliot Date: 5 months ago Commit: 757297f62c32eaf2af7f26ce66aa6499df776749 -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, I already fixed this bug, on cocoa vm's (5 minutes ago). I hope igor will check my changes and propagate them to unix/windows (it was, at least, present too on unix machines, but as I don't know which uuid library is correct for unix machines, I can not fix it myself) Philippe... I know it is lame... but if you want to recover your packages, all I can think is to re-save packages with new vm (or with primitive call removed) as I previous suggested. I'm sorry for the mess, I hope this is not drawing back the good energy all of us are putting in our projects. cheers, Esteban El 20/07/2011, a las 11:20a.m., Igor Stasenko escribiÃ³: > On 20 July 2011 14:29, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Philippe, >> There is no need to be so dramatic :) >> it was not a *known* issue. >> Better: *I* knew it, because I found same problem last week. I thought it was a problem with my virtual machines, which is still not production released, just collecting issues -like this-, that's why I didn't ran to solve it. When you described the problem, I thought it was same bug... and that's why I started think it was a general UUID plugin bug... >> we are collecting this problems, and solving them as soon as we can... >> >> please, be a little patient, your feedback is very important to us. >> > > Esteban, i think this bug is introduced after merging the plugin > codebase by Andreas (cog-->squeak trunk) > >> cheers, >> Esteban >> >> El 20/07/2011, a las 3:36a.m., Philippe Marschall escribiÃ³: >> >>> On 07/19/2011 09:41 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>> yes... there is a problem in latest vm's and UUID generation (I don't know if it is present at any vm or just mines, but well...). For the moment, faster solution is by deactivating uuid primitive, at: >>>> >>>> UUID>>#primMakeUUID >>>> <primitive: 'primitiveMakeUUID' module: 'UUIDPlugin'> >>>> UUIDGenerator default generateBytes: self forVersion: 4. >>>> >>>> just comment the primitive call. >>> >>> Guys, srsly? Is this some kind of practical joke? You have been shipping >>> with a known bug that has a trivial fix and eats peoples code? You are >>> wondering why nobody takes you seriously and you don't have more users? >>> You teach software engineering? >>> >>> This is exactly the kind of shit that makes me want to never again use >>> Pharo in production. This is the reason why I don't recommend Pharo to >>> other people. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Philippe >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Philippe Marschall

On 07/20/2011 03:59 PM, Torsten Bergmann wrote: > Hi Phillipe, > > software changes and (new) bugs can appear - thats life > and happens independent from Pharo or other technology. > > There is a simple rule: "If it is broken we should fix it" > and I would add "and make sure it wont bug us anymore again". > At least we should in minimum find such bugs before a release. > > Therefore attached is a simple test case that is green on my VM and > should be red on your VM. > > Let's integrate it into Pharo, you already know the usual procedure > to open an issue and I'm sure the Pharo team and VM maintainers will > take care. > > Simple as that ... > > Side note about recommending technologies and bug fixing: > > I once found a bug in Swing, others already reported it and > it is still after years(!) not fixed: > http://astares.blogspot.com/2007/01/disappointing-swing.html > So I have to wait and wait since I cant fix Swing myself... > > If this error would be in Smalltalk I would easily be able to change > it until it is officially fixed. So in Smalltalk I can easily move on > and it gives me the good feeling of beeing in control. > > Still Java is more recomended than Smalltalk. Why? Because > in the hopefully rare case a project really fails or is late > it could not have been the problem of choosing an exotic technology > since others use and recommend Java too (sometimes known as > the herd instinct) ;) Did the bug eat your code? Cheers Philippe

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Philippe Marschall

On 07/20/2011 04:14 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote: > On 20 July 2011 14:42, Philippe Marschall > <philippe.marschall(a)netcetera.ch> wrote: >> On 07/20/2011 09:00 AM, Serge Stinckwich wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Philippe Marschall >>> <philippe.marschall(a)netcetera.ch> wrote: >>>> On 07/19/2011 09:41 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>>> yes... there is a problem in latest vm's and UUID generation (I don't know if it is present at any vm or just mines, but well...). For the moment, faster solution is by deactivating uuid primitive, at: >>>>> >>>>> UUID>>#primMakeUUID >>>>> <primitive: 'primitiveMakeUUID' module: 'UUIDPlugin'> >>>>> UUIDGenerator default generateBytes: self forVersion: 4. >>>>> >>>>> just comment the primitive call. >>>> >>>> Guys, srsly? Is this some kind of practical joke? You have been shipping >>>> with a known bug that has a trivial fix and eats peoples code? You are >>>> wondering why nobody takes you seriously and you don't have more users? >>>> You teach software engineering? >>> >>> Hum, you know like in most open-source software project, nothing >>> happens by magic, unfortunately. >>> Human ressources are very scarce as Pharo is a part-time project for >>> most of us. Maybe your problem will required some interactions between >>> VM guys and Pharoers. Not something that could be done in 5 minutes. >>> >>> Did you submit an issue in the bug tracker just to keep track of it ? >>> Did you package some patch that could be used more easily by people >>> who do the release ? >>> >>>> This is exactly the kind of shit that makes me want to never again use >>>> Pharo in production. This is the reason why I don't recommend Pharo to >>>> other people. >>> >>> If you use Pharo in production did you give money to support the project ? >>> Pharo is not supported by a company (not yet), so no commitments could >>> be done on the speed of the adoption of patches. >>> People are just doing their best to enhance the system. And if you >>> help them (by packaging patches that solve some problems), everyone >>> will win in the long term. >> >> And that is completely fine. But then you don't have to be surprised >> when people don't take you serious, you don't have more users and you >> don't have any enterprise penetration. >> >> To quote from the project page: >> "We want Pharo to be the obvious choice for professional development in >> an open-source Smalltalk." >> >> Pro tip: if you want to be the obvious choice for professional >> development don't eat peoples code. >> > > Philippe, you are using Cog VMs which are under development. > Of course , we're all expecting that there is no regressions > introduced. But sometimes this happens. > This is normal for development process. > So, you discovered a bug, which needs to be fixed. But blaming pharo > for something, which we're not responsible for is a mistake. > > You should know better who to blame. Since you using "cog r2462", why > you addressing your claims to Pharo instead of VM developers? > Pharo images run on top of different VMs, and depending which one you > using, you mileage could vary. > > Well, maybe it wasn't clear to you. But keep in mind, depending on > what VM you using, you may have or not have bugs. So which WM do I have to use that when UUIDs don't work it's not my fault because I didn't fix the code? Cheers Philippe

July 20, 2011

[Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Torsten Bergmann

Igor wrote: >Feel free to submit an additional test for UUID to prevent this >regression in a future. I already provided such a test in my previous post: http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/2011-July/051481.html and now there is a fixed issue ready for integration http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4541 Nothing more to do on Pharo side than integration this test case into one of the next updates. But the VM maintainers should fix the issue for the VM Phillipe used. Bye T. -- NEU: FreePhone - 0ct/min Handyspartarif mit Geld-zurÃ¼ck-Garantie! Jetzt informieren: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freephone

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Igor Stasenko

On 20 July 2011 14:29, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Philippe, > There is no need to be so dramatic :) > it was not a *known* issue. > Better: *I* knew it, because I found same problem last week. I thought it was a problem with my virtual machines, which is still not production released, just collecting issues -like this-, that's why I didn't ran to solve it. When you described the problem, I thought it was same bug... and that's why I started think it was a general UUID plugin bug... > we are collecting this problems, and solving them as soon as we can... > > please, be a little patient, your feedback is very important to us. > Esteban, i think this bug is introduced after merging the plugin codebase by Andreas (cog-->squeak trunk) > cheers, > Esteban > > El 20/07/2011, a las 3:36a.m., Philippe Marschall escribiÃ³: > >> On 07/19/2011 09:41 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>> yes... there is a problem in latest vm's and UUID generation (I don't know if it is present at any vm or just mines, but well...). For the moment, faster solution is by deactivating uuid primitive, at: >>> >>> UUID>>#primMakeUUID >>> Â Â Â <primitive: 'primitiveMakeUUID' module: 'UUIDPlugin'> >>> Â Â Â UUIDGenerator default generateBytes: self forVersion: 4. >>> >>> just comment the primitive call. >> >> Guys, srsly? Is this some kind of practical joke? You have been shipping >> with a known bug that has a trivial fix and eats peoples code? You are >> wondering why nobody takes you seriously and you don't have more users? >> You teach software engineering? >> >> This is exactly the kind of shit that makes me want to never again use >> Pharo in production. This is the reason why I don't recommend Pharo to >> other people. >> >> Cheers >> Philippe >> >> > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

July 20, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] UUIDs not so unique

by Igor Stasenko

On 20 July 2011 14:42, Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall(a)netcetera.ch> wrote: > On 07/20/2011 09:00 AM, Serge Stinckwich wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Philippe Marschall >> <philippe.marschall(a)netcetera.ch> wrote: >>> On 07/19/2011 09:41 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>> yes... there is a problem in latest vm's and UUID generation (I don't know if it is present at any vm or just mines, but well...). For the moment, faster solution is by deactivating uuid primitive, at: >>>> >>>> UUID>>#primMakeUUID >>>> Â Â Â <primitive: 'primitiveMakeUUID' module: 'UUIDPlugin'> >>>> Â Â Â UUIDGenerator default generateBytes: self forVersion: 4. >>>> >>>> just comment the primitive call. >>> >>> Guys, srsly? Is this some kind of practical joke? You have been shipping >>> with a known bug that has a trivial fix and eats peoples code? You are >>> wondering why nobody takes you seriously and you don't have more users? >>> You teach software engineering? >> >> Hum, you know like in most open-source software project, nothing >> happens by magic, unfortunately. >> Human ressources are very scarce as Pharo is a part-time project for >> most of us. Maybe your problem will required some interactions between >> VM guys and Pharoers. Not something that could be done in 5 minutes. >> >> Did you submit an issue in the bug tracker just to keep track of it ? >> Did you package some patch that could be used more easily by people >> who do the release ? >> >>> This is exactly the kind of shit that makes me want to never again use >>> Pharo in production. This is the reason why I don't recommend Pharo to >>> other people. >> >> If you use Pharo in production did you give money to support the project ? >> Pharo is not supported by a company (not yet), so no commitments could >> be done on the speed of the adoption of patches. >> People are just doing their best to enhance the system. And if you >> help them (by packaging patches that solve some problems), everyone >> will win in the long term. > > And that is completely fine. But then you don't have to be surprised > when people don't take you serious, you don't have more users and you > don't have any enterprise penetration. > > To quote from the project page: > "We want Pharo to be the obvious choice for professional development in > an open-source Smalltalk." > > Pro tip: if you want to be the obvious choice for professional > development don't eat peoples code. > Philippe, you are using Cog VMs which are under development. Of course , we're all expecting that there is no regressions introduced. But sometimes this happens. This is normal for development process. So, you discovered a bug, which needs to be fixed. But blaming pharo for something, which we're not responsible for is a mistake. You should know better who to blame. Since you using "cog r2462", why you addressing your claims to Pharo instead of VM developers? Pharo images run on top of different VMs, and depending which one you using, you mileage could vary. Well, maybe it wasn't clear to you. But keep in mind, depending on what VM you using, you may have or not have bugs. At the end of this week (i hope) i will set up a test runners for VMs we're building, so we can automatically track regressions from change to change, including one you discovered. Feel free to submit an additional test for UUID to prevent this regression in a future. Something like: size := ((1 to: 100) collect: [ :i | UUID new asString ]) asSet size self assert: size = 100 and we will happily integrate it. > Cheers > Philippe -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

July 20, 2011