# Workarounds for ruby 1.8.6 segmentations faults **URL:** \ **Category:** ruby-talk\ **Created:** [1 July 2008 21:22 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461 "2008-07-01T21:22:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![liquid\_rails](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4491bb/32.png) [@liquid\_rails](https://rubytalk.org/u/liquid_rails)\ **Post date:** [1 July 2008 21:22 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/1 "2008-07-01T21:22:11Z")
Hi, I am running Rails 2.1.0 and ruby-1.8.6 (2008-06-20 patchlevel 230 [i686-linux]. I am experiencing the same segmentation faults that several others are who are running this version or ruby. Can anyone recommend a good workaround for these bugs until the Rails Core Team puts out something official? Thanks! Cheri ---
**Author:** ![Jason\_R](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/94ad74/32.png) [@Jason\_R](https://rubytalk.org/u/Jason_R)\ **Post date:** [1 July 2008 21:25 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/2 "2008-07-01T21:25:51Z")
Um, I somehow doubt it's Rails segfaulting. I'm running the same Ruby and Rails and have had no issues. What exactly is throwing the seg faults? Jason > **···** > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:22 PM, liquid\_rails \ wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I am running Rails 2.1.0 and ruby-1.8.6 (2008-06-20 patchlevel 230 > > [i686-linux]. I am experiencing the same segmentation faults that > > several others are who are running this version or ruby. Can anyone > > recommend a good workaround for these bugs until the Rails Core Team > > puts out something official? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Cheri ---
**Author:** ![Charles\_Oliver\_Nutte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@Charles\_Oliver\_Nutte](https://rubytalk.org/u/Charles_Oliver_Nutte)\ **Post date:** [1 July 2008 21:58 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/3 "2008-07-01T21:58:12Z")
liquid\_rails wrote: > Hi, > > I am running Rails 2.1.0 and ruby-1.8.6 (2008-06-20 patchlevel 230 > [i686-linux]. I am experiencing the same segmentation faults that > several others are who are running this version or ruby. Can anyone > recommend a good workaround for these bugs until the Rails Core Team > puts out something official? I'll probably get smacked for this, but you could certainly try JRuby in the meantime. We're not affected by those security issues and run Rails 2.1 fine... Perhaps an opportunity to try something new? - Charlie ---
**Author:** ![liquid\_rails](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4491bb/32.png) [@liquid\_rails](https://rubytalk.org/u/liquid_rails)\ **Post date:** [1 July 2008 21:32 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/4 "2008-07-01T21:32:08Z")
It's not Rails, it's Ruby. See [Ruby 1.9.0/1.8.7/1.8.6/1.8.5 new releases (Security Fix) - Ruby - Ruby-Forum](http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/157034) > **···** > > On Jul 1, 2:25 pm, Jason Roelofs \ wrote: > > > Um, I somehow doubt it's Rails segfaulting. I'm running the same Ruby > > and Rails and have had no issues. > > > > What exactly is throwing the seg faults? > > > > Jason > > > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:22 PM, liquid\_rails \ wrote: > > \> Hi, > > > > \> I am running Rails 2.1.0 and ruby-1.8.6 (2008-06-20 patchlevel 230 > > \> [i686-linux]. I am experiencing the same segmentation faults that > > \> several others are who are running this version or ruby. Can anyone > > \> recommend a good workaround for these bugs until the Rails Core Team > > \> puts out something official? > > > > \> Thanks! > > > > \> Cheri ---
**Author:** ![\_Pena\_Botp1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/_/94ad74/32.png) [@\_Pena\_Botp1](https://rubytalk.org/u/_Pena_Botp1)\ **Post date:** [2 July 2008 00:59 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/5 "2008-07-02T00:59:00Z")
# try JRuby in the meantime. We're not affected by those security # issues and run Rails 2.1 fine... indeed. that's a great plus for jruby. will jruby support ruby1.9 and future ruby versions? thanks and kind regards -botp > **···** > > From: Charles Oliver Nutter [[mailto:charles.nutter@sun.com](mailto:charles.nutter@sun.com)] ---
**Author:** ![James\_Britt3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b782af/32.png) [@James\_Britt3](https://rubytalk.org/u/James_Britt3)\ **Post date:** [2 July 2008 08:04 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/6 "2008-07-02T08:04:12Z")
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > I'll probably get smacked for this, but you could certainly try JRuby in the meantime. We're not affected by those security issues and run Rails 2.1 fine... Possible roadblock: You're using native-code libraries that do not have JRuby analogues. > **···** > > -- > James Britt > > [www.happycamperstudios.com](http://www.happycamperstudios.com) - Wicked Cool Coding > [www.jamesbritt.com](http://www.jamesbritt.com) - Playing with Better Toys > [www.ruby-doc.org](http://www.ruby-doc.org) - Ruby Help & Documentation > [www.rubystuff.com](http://www.rubystuff.com) - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff ---
**Author:** ![liquid\_rails](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4491bb/32.png) [@liquid\_rails](https://rubytalk.org/u/liquid_rails)\ **Post date:** [1 July 2008 21:47 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/7 "2008-07-01T21:47:10Z")
See also [http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&aid=20902&group\_id=426&atid=1698](http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&aid=20902&group_id=426&atid=1698) - Cheri > **···** > > On Jul 1, 2:31 pm, liquid\_rails \ wrote: > > > It's not Rails, it's Ruby. Seehttp://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/157034 > > > > On Jul 1, 2:25 pm, Jason Roelofs \ wrote: > > > > \> Um, I somehow doubt it's Rails segfaulting. I'm running the same Ruby > > \> and Rails and have had no issues. > > > > \> What exactly is throwing the seg faults? > > > > \> Jason > > > > \> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:22 PM, liquid\_rails \ wrote: > > \> \> Hi, > > > > \> \> I am running Rails 2.1.0 and ruby-1.8.6 (2008-06-20 patchlevel 230 > > \> \> [i686-linux]. I am experiencing the same segmentation faults that > > \> \> several others are who are running this version or ruby. Can anyone > > \> \> recommend a good workaround for these bugs until the Rails Core Team > > \> \> puts out something official? > > > > \> \> Thanks! > > > > \> \> Cheri ---
**Author:** ![Charles\_Oliver\_Nutte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@Charles\_Oliver\_Nutte](https://rubytalk.org/u/Charles_Oliver_Nutte)\ **Post date:** [2 July 2008 10:35 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/8 "2008-07-02T10:35:42Z")
Peña wrote: > From: Charles Oliver Nutter [mailto:charles.nutter@sun.com] # try JRuby in the meantime. We're not affected by those security # issues and run Rails 2.1 fine... > > indeed. that's a great plus for jruby. > will jruby support ruby1.9 and future ruby versions? Yes, we plan to start adding 1.9 features over the summer and into fall, with final support being ready around 1.9.1 release time at Christmas. - Charlie ---
**Author:** ![\_Pena\_Botp1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/_/94ad74/32.png) [@\_Pena\_Botp1](https://rubytalk.org/u/_Pena_Botp1)\ **Post date:** [2 July 2008 10:50 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/9 "2008-07-02T10:50:53Z")
# Yes, we plan to start adding 1.9 features over the summer and # into fall, with final support being ready around 1.9.1 release # time at Christmas. wow, very cool indeed. i'd like to test it on ramaze since ramaze is 1.9 ready. thanks for jruby kind regards -botp > **···** > > From: [Charles.O.Nutter@sun.com](mailto:Charles.O.Nutter@sun.com) ---
**Author:** ![Jason\_R](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/94ad74/32.png) [@Jason\_R](https://rubytalk.org/u/Jason_R)\ **Post date:** [2 July 2008 12:06 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/10 "2008-07-02T12:06:09Z")
Wow, we're also seeing seg-faults with this. So a possibly vulnerable -p114 or a non-working -p230, nice. Hmm, I didn't see problems locally because the ebuild for p230 includes a rollback patch that reverts change 15856. We'll see what the official fix is, hopefully it's soon. Jason > **···** > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 6:50 AM, Peña, Botp \ wrote: > > > From: Charles.O.Nutter@sun.com > > # Yes, we plan to start adding 1.9 features over the summer and > > # into fall, with final support being ready around 1.9.1 release > > # time at Christmas. > > > > wow, very cool indeed. > > i'd like to test it on ramaze since ramaze is 1.9 ready. > > > > thanks for jruby > > kind regards -botp ---
**Author:** ![Charles\_Oliver\_Nutte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@Charles\_Oliver\_Nutte](https://rubytalk.org/u/Charles_Oliver_Nutte)\ **Post date:** [2 July 2008 12:07 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/11 "2008-07-02T12:07:46Z")
Peña wrote: > From: Charles.O.Nutter@sun.com # Yes, we plan to start adding 1.9 features over the summer and # into fall, with final support being ready around 1.9.1 release # time at Christmas. > > wow, very cool indeed. > i'd like to test it on ramaze since ramaze is 1.9 ready. For what it's worth, JRuby will support both 1.8 and 1.9 in the same distribution: ➔ jruby -help Usage: jruby [switches] [--] [programfile] [arguments]    -0[octal] specify record separator (, if no argument)    -a autosplit mode with -n or -p (splits $\_ into $F) ...    --1.8 specify Ruby 1.8.x compatibility (default)    --1.9 specify Ruby 1.9.x compatibility    --version print the version - Charlie ---
**Author:** ![Michal\_hramrach\_Such](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ab097/32.png) [@Michal\_hramrach\_Such](https://rubytalk.org/u/Michal_hramrach_Such)\ **Post date:** [2 July 2008 13:22 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/workarounds-for-ruby-1-8-6-segmentations-faults/47461/12 "2008-07-02T13:22:50Z")
If it segfaults and you did not investigate why you should assume it is also vulnerable, although probably to a different thing. Thanks Michal > **···** > > On 02/07/2008, Jason Roelofs \ wrote: > > > Wow, we're also seeing seg-faults with this. > > > > So a possibly vulnerable -p114 or a non-working -p230, nice.