Marc Espie [es...@nerim.net] wrote: > I've looked a bit at this code. > > I'm on the fence between marking it as BROKEN and give Chris a chance to > fix the code, or downright removing it. > > Specifically, it's currently broken thanks to recent changes to if.h, > but the code warns all over the place. There seems to be a misconception > that '\0' would be a NULL pointer (it's not, it's a character constant). >
Well it was to mark the end of arguments in constructed argument lists, but maybe just NULL would be fine. > Looking a bit deeper, clang finds at least one actual bug and some > seriously confused code (strlcpy with size from the src instead of the dest, > which is kind-of okay in this case because it is the same size, but still). > Ugh > I don't know who actually uses nsh, but I wouldn't recommend it in its > present state... After all, you're running code as root, it should at least > keep the warnings down... and it's not like we moved to clang two days ago. > I'll fix this up
