Re: Release of amanda-2.5.0b2
2006-02-09 00:37:12
Actually, I removed the check for a NULL pointer since str
should never be NULL. str is assigned by a call to
syncpipe_getstr() which will, in practice, never return a
NULL pointer. The only way to get there in the old code is
to have the other side of the syncpipe write an invalid string length ( <= 0).
However, it looks as though I left out the modification to
syncpipe_getstr() which calls error() when an invalid length
is passed and guarantees a NULL is *never* returned...
(See attached patch).
Regards,
John Franks
----- Original Message -----
From: "Josef Wolf" <jw AT raven.inka DOT de>
To: <amanda-users AT amanda DOT org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: Release of amanda-2.5.0b2
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 08:48:15AM -0800, Paddy Sreenivasan wrote:
> But I am not sure whether I correctly understand the proposal. Is the
> following the proposed fix?
Yes. Please add test results to the bug tracker.
I have arranged for the test tonight. I'll report tomorrow.
Thanks!
BTW: Checkin 1.111->1.112 of server-src/taper.c looks a little bit strange
to me. Especially two hunks I've appended to the end of this mail.
When ``str ? str : "(null)"´´ results in "(null)" the str was the NULL
pointer. Will the called function newvstralloc() be able to cope with
the passed NULL?
@@ -1428,7 +1428,7 @@
"[sec ", walltime_str(runtime),
" kb ", kb_str,
" kps ", kps_str,
- " ", str ? str : "(null)",
+ " ", str,
"]",
NULL);
@@ -1469,7 +1467,7 @@
"[sec ",
walltime_str(curdump_rt),
" kb ", kb_str,
" kps ", kps_str,
- " ", str ? str : "(null)",
+ " ", str,
"]",
NULL);
putresult(DONE, "%s %s %d %s\n", handle, label,
syncpipe_putstr.patch
Description: Binary data
|
|
|