[Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#490588: octave-ftp: octave segfaults on clear all command

[Rafael Laboissiere]

package octave-ftp
tags 490588 confirmed upstream
thanks

The following bug report has been filed against the octave-ftp package in
Debian (also in http://bugs.debian.org/490588):

* Juergen Rinas <jrinas at gmx.de> [2008-07-13 00:09]:

> Package: octave-ftp
> Version: 1.0-1
> Severity: normal
> 
> 
> when
>   octave-ftp 1.0-1
> package is installed,
>   octave3.0 1:3.0.1-4
> segfaults, when the command
>   "clear all"
> is entered within octave.
> 
> 
> octave:1> clear all
> panic: Segmentation fault -- stopping myself...
> attempting to save variables to `octave-core'...
> save to `octave-core' complete
> 
> 
> deinstallation of the octave-ftp package fixes this problem...

I confirm the problem and I think that it is related to the SWIG wrapping.
Package octave-ann suffers from the same problem.  The octave-ftp is
autoloaded in Debian and after running ftpobj from PKG_ADD at Octave
startup, the following variables appear in the worspace (this is an excerpt
of the output of "whos"):

*** dynamically linked functions:

  Prot Name              Size                     Bytes  Class
  ==== ====              ====                     =====  =====
   [snip]
   rwd ftpobj           -1x-1                         0  dynamically-linked function

*** globally visible user variables:

  Prot Name                  Size                     Bytes  Class
  ==== ====                  ====                     =====  =====
   rwd __SWIG_MODULE__4      1x1                          8  uint64
   rwd cvar                 -1x-1                         0  swig_ref
   rwd ftp                  -1x-1                         0  swig_ref
   rwd ftpobj               -1x-1                         0  swig_ref
   
It is curious that ftpobj appears twice, both as a dynamically linked
function and as a user variable.  By the way, the following commands also
cause a segmentation fault:

octave:1> clear ftpobj; clear ftpobj; whos

[Please, respect the Mail-Followup-To header when replying to this message.]
   
-- 
Rafael