GNU bug report logs

#33848 Store references in SBCL-compiled code are "invisible"

PackageSource(s)Maintainer(s)
guix PTS Buildd Popcon
Full log

Message #109 received at 33848@debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Received: (at 33848) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2021 08:48:51 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Apr 01 04:48:51 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56266 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1lRt0U-0000a5-UC
	for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2021 04:48:51 -0400
Received: from relay7-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.200]:39747)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <mail@ambrevar.xyz>) id 1lRt0T-0000Zl-Dr
 for 33848@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2021 04:48:49 -0400
X-Originating-IP: 92.169.147.163
Received: from bababa (lfbn-idf2-1-1335-163.w92-169.abo.wanadoo.fr
 [92.169.147.163]) (Authenticated sender: mail@ambrevar.xyz)
 by relay7-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E79D320018;
 Thu,  1 Apr 2021 08:48:42 +0000 (UTC)
From: Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>, Mark H Weaver
 <mhw@netris.org>
Subject: Re: bug#33848: Store references in SBCL-compiled code are "invisible"
In-Reply-To: <87eefu30a4.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87r2e8jpfx.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0psi1xo.fsf@gnu.org>
 <874lb3kin6.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87sgynezha.fsf@gnu.org>
 <87tvj2yesd.fsf@netris.org> <877efwe04u.fsf@gnu.org>
 <8736qji7c1.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87tvizvzgk.fsf@netris.org>
 <87o9979gfn.fsf@gnu.org> <87tvizgghs.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
 <87k1juaomo.fsf@gnu.org> <87muoqhk62.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
 <87zhsq8wkj.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0pmhbgn.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
 <87r2e28tkv.fsf@gnu.org> <874laygkiy.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
 <87lfa5eymf.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87tuoscsk9.fsf@gnu.org>
 <87im57b8u7.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87czvebky2.fsf@netris.org>
 <87eefu30a4.fsf@gnu.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 10:48:41 +0200
Message-ID: <87eefu9yqe.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
 micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
 has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
 message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  Hi! > The separate ASCII file doesn’t solve it all because,
    as you write, we’d > need to change the grafting code as well. > > Then
    it might be simpler to use a “byte vector” data type for those > [...]
    
 
 Content analysis details:   (1.8 points, 10.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW      RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
                             low trust
                             [217.70.183.200 listed in list.dnswl.org]
  0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4      RBL: Very Good reputation (+4)
                             [217.70.183.200 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
  2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD      Untrustworthy TLDs
                             [URI: ambrevar.xyz (xyz)]
  0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE          SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD   From abused NTLD
  0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 33848
Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@posteo.net>, 33848@debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
 has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
 message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  Hi! > The separate ASCII file doesn’t solve it all because,
    as you write, we’d > need to change the grafting code as well. > > Then
    it might be simpler to use a “byte vector” data type for those > [...]
    
 
 Content analysis details:   (1.8 points, 10.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW      RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
                             low trust
                             [217.70.183.200 listed in list.dnswl.org]
  0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4      RBL: Very Good reputation (+4)
                             [217.70.183.200 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
  2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD      Untrustworthy TLDs
                             [URI: ambrevar.xyz (xyz)]
  0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE          SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD   From abused NTLD
 -1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI     Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
                             manager
  0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders
  1.0 BULK_RE_SUSP_NTLD      Precedence bulk and RE: from a suspicious TLD
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi!

> The separate ASCII file doesn’t solve it all because, as you write, we’d
> need to change the grafting code as well.
>
> Then it might be simpler to use a “byte vector” data type for those
> strings.

Which strings and where would we use byte vectors?

> We’ll have to wait for Pierre’s patches to get a better idea.
> :-)

By "Pierre's patches", you mean a patch to add a build phase that
generates an file listings all references?

Cheers!

-- 
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.


debbugs.gnu.org maintainers <help-debbugs@gnu.org>. Last modified: Sat Apr 12 12:44:35 2025; Machine Name: wallace-server

GNU bug tracking system

Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.

Copyright © 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson, 2005-2017 Don Armstrong, and many other contributors.