Dietz, Phil E. wrote: > > I'd be very surprised if it was a bug with Insure....it has found so many > bugs in our code, it is worth paying through the nose for (10k plus 2k a > year maint).
It may be expensive, and worth it, but I'm afraid that doesn't make it infallible. The errors I pointed out are errors, and price doesn't affect that. Be surprised, because they are bugs. OK, to be a little fairer, IMO: 1. The first one - semctl(..RMID..) - is definite. Insure got it wrong. 2. The second should perhaps be declared as regmatch_t *pmatch, instead of regmatch_t pmatch[], but Insure still diagnosed incorrectly. 3. The third is moot: we shouldn't allow it to overrun the buffer by putting a too large number in for the buffer size, but on the other hand the format string simply can't ever use anything like that much buffer. Believe me, if Insure found a real bug with Apache we'd all be jumping for joy and rushing to fix it. But the first simply isn't a bug and the other two are cosmetic. Cheers, Ben. -- Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686| Apache Group member Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org and Technical Director|Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | A.L. Digital Ltd, |Apache-SSL author http://www.apache-ssl.org/ London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache
