Re: [PATCH] Don't rely on unspecified behavior

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello!

On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 08:30:07PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > Calling access(p, m) with p == NULL is not specified, so don't do that.  On
> > GNU/Hurd systems doing so will result in a SIGSEGV.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Schwinge <tschwinge@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> 
> Isn't this the same patch as you sent before?

As I wrote in <20070728182542.GA22651@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: ``I noticed
that the patch I sent was prepared for an old version of the file.  I'll
send an updated patch that applies to the current revision.''

> > +		if (excludes_file != NULL && !access(excludes_file, R_OK))
> 
> We usually omit the "!= NULL"; see the other source code in git.git.

Okay, so I should sent a thusly modified version to get it applied?


Regards,
 Thomas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux