Am 13.08.2016 um 20:16 schrieb Daniel Dickinson: > On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 17:13 +0200, Josua Mayer wrote: >> Hi John, >> >> I have finally found the time to look into this, and managed to >> reproduce the segfault that Álvaro noticed. >> It is caused by a call to fclose(0x0); This is very unexpected, >> shouldn't the C library check for NULL and return quietly? > > C generally doesn't do any prevent shooting yourself in the foot type > checks for things related to memory/fd/handle management. Part of the > reason is fast and small is that it leaves most things up to the > programmer. I've head RUST is supposed to be a new thing that might be > small and fast but safer, but that's just what I'm told, I haven't > looked into it, and don't really know anything about it. I did some research, and apparently fclose(0) is undefined. To each C library its own behaviour. Luckily that call is now properly prevented! > > Regards, > > Daniel >
_______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev