Dave> I'm not sure I'd describe this behaviour as "inconsistent". Dave> It's not uncommon to use the same parameter in both directions, Dave> so passing the buffer length in, and the actual length back is Dave> not unreasonable. Robert> I quite agree. However, this function doesn't do that. The Robert> length in is only used if the string doesn't start with "0x" Robert> and no buffer is passed in.
There are a few too many negatives in that sentance for me to be able to understand it easily :-) However a quick test program showed that this routine is ignoring the length of an existing buffer when interpreting a hex string. I've just applied a patch to fix this. It seems to handle the other three cases correctly (a printable string with an existing buffer, and dynamically allocating both printable and hex strings). Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
