Keep the patch in there for now.
--Wez.
On Sun, 16 Feb 2003, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
> So should I revert the patch on HEAD then?
>
> Moriyoshi
>
> Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Actually, the return values throughout that function are all bogus...
> > Don't worry about reverting
So should I revert the patch on HEAD then?
Moriyoshi
Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, the return values throughout that function are all bogus...
> Don't worry about reverting (for 4.3).
> I'll add this to my TODO for PHP 5.
>
> --Wez.
>
> On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Wez Furlong wro
Actually, the return values throughout that function are all bogus...
Don't worry about reverting (for 4.3).
I'll add this to my TODO for PHP 5.
--Wez.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Wez Furlong wrote:
> This is a bogus patch; the return value of the php_stream_copy_to_XXX
> functions are the number of by
This is a bogus patch; the return value of the php_stream_copy_to_XXX
functions are the number of bytes that were copied, and this patch
breaks that.
The correct fix for #22234 is to fix php_copy_file() to handle a 0
return from this function.
Please revert!
--Wez.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Moriyosh
Nope. The problem was that size_t is unsigned, but -1 is signed.
--Wez.
On 10/19/02, "Sander Roobol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 10:34:10AM -, Wez Furlong wrote:
> > - if (justread > 0) {
> > + if (justread != (size_t)-1) {
>
> Shouldn't that be
On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 10:34:10AM -, Wez Furlong wrote:
> - if (justread > 0) {
> + if (justread != (size_t)-1) {
Shouldn't that be someting like this?
>>> if (justread != sizeof(size_t)-1) {
Sander
--
PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubs
