On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:07:22 -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 11:57:53PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Your theory is false, your code is broken. You really need to free() > > the line buffer when it is allocated by getline(). But you call getline() > > in a while-loop without resetting the line pointer to NULL. > > True. > > > Here's the fix: > > But this is not how getline is meant to be used. This way each getline call > will allocate a new buffer. getline is designed so that you can use it in a > loop with just one allocated buffer, which is realloced by getline when > needed. So the right fix would be actually to move the free(line); > statement after the loop. Of course if you e.g. want to preserve the buffer > with the line data, stick pointer to it into some data structure, then you'd > just do that and clear the pointer so that next getline iteration will > allocate a fresh buffer. Yeah, but that explanation and optimisation goes beyond pointing out what causes the segfault in the implicit malloc. ;) Basically, everything about how getline can be used is explained in the man page already anyway, i.e. you either start with a NULL lineptr or rely on the automatic realloc. Here there's even example code in the man page. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
