[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1836?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14003089#comment-14003089
]
Hudson commented on ZOOKEEPER-1836:
-----------------------------------
FAILURE: Integrated in ZooKeeper-trunk #2311 (See
[https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2311/])
ZOOKEEPER-1836. addrvec_next() fails to set next parameter if addrvec_hasnext()
returns false (Dutch T. Meyer via michim) (michim:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/?root=Apache-SVN&view=rev&rev=1595038)
* /zookeeper/trunk/CHANGES.txt
* /zookeeper/trunk/src/c/src/addrvec.c
> addrvec_next() fails to set next parameter if addrvec_hasnext() returns false
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ZOOKEEPER-1836
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1836
> Project: ZooKeeper
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: c client
> Reporter: Dutch T. Meyer
> Assignee: Dutch T. Meyer
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 3.5.0
>
> Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-1836.patch, ZOOKEEPER-1836.patch
>
>
> There is a relatively innocuous but useless pointer assignment in
> addrvec_next():
> 195 void addrvec_next(addrvec_t *avec, struct sockaddr_storage *next)
> ....
> 203 if (!addrvec_hasnext(avec))
> 204 {
> 205 next = NULL;
> 206 return;
> That assignment on (205) has no point, as next is a local variable lost upon
> function return. Likely this should be a memset to zero out the actual
> parameter.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
