On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 17:38:48 +0200 Bart wrote: BVA> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Magnus Fromreide <[email protected]>wrote: BVA> > > + /* restore the interface name if we modifed it due to unaliasing BVA> > > + * above BVA> > > + */ BVA> > > + if (entry->flags | NETSNMP_ACCESS_IPADDRESS_ISALIAS) { BVA> > > + memcpy(ifrp->ifr_name, extras->name, sizeof(extras->name)); BVA> > > + } BVA> > > Am I the only one who considers this code as obviously broken ? BVA> > BVA> Since _ioctl_extras.name is declared as an array, using sizeof(extras->name) BVA> [...] Actually I was referring to the " | BVA> NETSNMP_ACCESS_IPADDRESS_ISALIAS" part which causes the condition always to BVA> evaluate to true. Shouldn't that be "& ..." instead ?
yep. I started to fix it, then thought better of it since I haven't kept up with the new utilties for merging between branches... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
