On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:06:56PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017/06/29 21:37, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > security(8) iterates over /var/mail and check is the files belong to the
> > owner of the same name. So far so good, but spamd.con
Hi,
security(8) iterates over /var/mail and check is the files belong to the
owner of the same name. So far so good, but spamd.conf.5 says:
override:\
:white:\
:method=file:\
:file=/var/mail/override.txt:
myblack:\
:black:\
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:59:36PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 08:01:02PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > As suggested by deraadt@ and tobias@ it might be better to use the *return*
> > statement instead of exit(3)
> > insid
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:42:10AM +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
Ping ...
>
> this seems fine to me
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:38:40PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > Hi tech@,
> >
> > most of the tools implements the *usage* function above th
- Forwarded message from Fritjof Bornebusch <frit...@alokat.org> -
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 22:00:58 +0200
From: Fritjof Bornebusch <frit...@alokat.org>
To: Michael Reed <m.r...@mykolab.com>
Cc: tech@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: [patch] lpr atoi -> strtonum
On Fri, Sep 2
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:56:18PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping ...
> Hi tech@,
>
> mark this unlink(2) call as *(void)*, as there is no need to check the return
> value.
> This makes it more consistent to all other unlink(2) calls, since they are
> marked as
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 05:08:21PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping
>
> Index: apmd.c
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/apmd/apmd.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.75
> diff -u -p -r1.75 apmd.c
> --- ap
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 09:19:28PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:53:57PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > Hi tech@,
> >
> > *edp1* and *edp2* could be used uninitialized, if *goto closem;* is called.
> >
>
> Such initialize
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 02:23:21PM -0400, Michael Reed wrote:
> Hi Fritjof,
>
Hi Michael,
> I left one comment inline.
>
thanks.
> On 09/25/15 08:18, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > change atoi(3) -> strtonum(3) in lpr(1) and lprm(1).
Hi,
this diff changes the following:
- exit(3) to return at the end of main functions
- use /* NOTREACHED */ were it belongs according to style(9)
- lpc.c and lpd.c lack a return at the end of the main functions, as the main
loops exists the
program. I'm not sure if this is a "coders choise"
Hi,
change atoi(3) -> strtonum(3) in lpr(1) and lprm(1).
lprm(1) avoids negative numbers to be the first argument by using getopt(3),
but supported values like 2.2.
--F.
Index: lpr/lpr.c
===
RCS file:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 09:19:28PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:53:57PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > Hi tech@,
> >
> > *edp1* and *edp2* could be used uninitialized, if *goto closem;* is called.
> >
>
> Such initialize
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:56:18PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> Hi tech@,
>
> mark this unlink(2) call as *(void)*, as there is no need to check the return
> value.
> This makes it more consistent to all other unlink(2) calls, since they are
> marked as *(void)* as
&g
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:42:10AM +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
>
> this seems fine to me
>
Ping ...
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:38:40PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > Hi tech@,
> >
> > most of the tools implements the *usage* function above th
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:59:36PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 08:01:02PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> > As suggested by deraadt@ and tobias@ it might be better to use the *return*
> > statement instead of exit(3)
> > inside the *m
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 08:01:02PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
> As suggested by deraadt@ and tobias@ it might be better to use the *return*
> statement instead of exit(3)
> inside the *main* function, to let the stack protector do its work.
>
> This diff removes such calls
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:56:18PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping
Hi tech@,
mark this unlink(2) call as *(void)*, as there is no need to check the return
value.
This makes it more consistent to all other unlink(2) calls, since they are
marked as *(void)* as
well.
Regards
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:42:10AM +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
this seems fine to me
Ping
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:38:40PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech@,
most of the tools implements the *usage* function above the *main* function.
This patch makes it more
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:49:32PM +0200, Pablo Méndez Hernández wrote:
Hi,
El 18/6/2015 22:46, Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org escribiA^3:
Hi tech@,
*logins is omitted* sounds a little strange, doesn't it?
logins as a keyword?
Yes, but if you read
What about this comma.
I saw a few manpages, having it at this location.
Regards,
--F.
Index: merge.1
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/merge.1,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.3 merge.1
--- merge.1 28 Oct 2010
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:48:23PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:33:53PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech@,
isn't there a comma missing?
depends how you like your commas. if i were writing it, i'd have the
comma. but many wouldn;t, and it's
Hi tech@,
isn't there a comma missing?
Regards,
--F.
Index: ci.1
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/ci.1,v
retrieving revision 1.38
diff -u -p -r1.38 ci.1
--- ci.112 Aug 2013 14:19:53 - 1.38
+++ ci.118 Jun
Hi tech@,
*logins is omitted* sounds a little strange, doesn't it?
Regards,
--F.
Index: rlog.1
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/rlog.1,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -p -r1.24 rlog.1
--- rlog.1 3 Sep 2010 11:09:29 -
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:57:13PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:44:07PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech@,
*logins is omitted* sounds a little strange, doesn't it?
it does, because in your head you're thinking of logins as being the
plural of login
Hi tech@,
as requested by nicm@, xstrdup calls strdup(3) now.
Regards,
--F.
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/diff/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -p -r1.6 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 29 Apr 2015 04:00:25
Hi tech@,
*edp1* and *edp2* could be used uninitialized, if *goto closem;* is called.
Regards,
--F.
Index: diffdir.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/diff/diffdir.c,v
retrieving revision 1.43
diff -u -p -r1.43 diffdir.c
---
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:53:57PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech@,
*edp1* and *edp2* could be used uninitialized, if *goto closem;* is called.
Such initializers hiding a false positive, cause the compiler does not
understand this case can never happen.
- warning: 'edp1' may
Hi tech@,
as requested by nicm@, xstrdup calls strdup(3) now.
Regards,
--F.
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/file/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 24 Apr 2015 16:24:11
Hi tech@,
as requested by nicm@, xstrdup just wrappes strdup(3).
Regards,
--F.
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/ssh/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.32
diff -u -p -r1.32 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 24 Apr 2015
who should answer that question. ;)
Regards,
--F.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:00:01AM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi,
thanks for the hint.
This one should do the trick.
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file
Hi tech@,
just saw I missed removing the null check before calling free(3), sorry.
Regards,
--F.
Index: ci.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/ci.c,v
retrieving revision 1.220
diff -u -p -r1.220 ci.c
--- ci.c13 Jun 2015
Hi tech@,
mark this unlink(2) call as *(void)*, as there is no need to check the return
value.
This makes it more consistent to all other unlink(2) calls, since they are
marked as *(void)* as
well.
Regards,
--F.
Index: co.c
===
Hi,
thanks for the hint.
This one should do the trick.
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -p -r1.9 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 13 Jun 2015 20:15:21 - 1.9
+++
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 05:02:05PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
But I am not sure about this change. xmalloc.c came from ssh (and is
also used by file and diff). Would it be better to keep it in sync? How
portable is strdup?
strdup is extremely portable.
The last mainstream operating
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 07:37:57PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 10:55:34AM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 08:57:06PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi,
xstrdup just wrappes strdup, so there is no need to call xmalloc
Hi tech@,
most of the tools implements the *usage* function above the *main* function.
This patch makes it more consistent to these tools and where the different
*usage*
functions are implemented in rcs in general.
Any comments?
Regards,
--F.
Index: co.c
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 09:33:59AM +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
Hi. You missed date.y:
date.y: In function 'yyerror':
date.y:497: error: implicit declaration of function 'xfree'
Ups, sorry.
That should do the trick.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 12:43:29AM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote
Hi tech@,
Without PGP / SMIME stuff, sorry.
a couple of months ago I removed the if condition in the *xfree* function,
but tedu@ suggested
that it would be better to remove the *xfree* function entirely instead.
If've seen there are *efree* functions in some tools, that just wrappes
Hi tech@,
a couple of months ago I removed the if condition in the *xfree* function, but
tedu@ suggested
that it would be better to remove the *xfree* function entirely instead.
If've seen there are *efree* functions in some tools, that just wrappes the
free(3) function call.
I'm not quite
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 10:55:34AM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 08:57:06PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi,
xstrdup just wrappes strdup, so there is no need to call xmalloc and
strlcpy instead.
Ping
Use err() instead of errx(), so errno
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 08:57:06PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi,
xstrdup just wrappes strdup, so there is no need to call xmalloc and
strlcpy instead.
Use err() instead of errx(), so errno will be printed additionally.
Thanks to Tim.
Regards,
--F.
Regards,
--F.
Index
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 09:35:03PM +0200, Alexander Hall wrote:
On May 20, 2015 5:08:21 PM GMT+02:00, Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org
wrote:
Hi,
for what is the ? sign for?
fallthrough to usage()
But why is this necessary, haven't seen this in other deamons?
BTW: isn't
Hi,
for what is the ? sign for?
Regards,
--F.
Index: apmd.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/apmd/apmd.c,v
retrieving revision 1.75
diff -u -p -r1.75 apmd.c
--- apmd.c 6 Feb 2015 08:16:50 - 1.75
+++ apmd.c 20
Hi,
xstrdup just wrappes strdup, so there is no need to call xmalloc and
strlcpy instead.
Regards,
--F.
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -u -p -r1.8 xmalloc.c
---
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 01:48:44PM +0100, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping ..
Hi tech@,
looks like there are some missing periods regarding the sudo wrong
password messages.
fritjof
Index: ins_csops.h
===
RCS file: /cvs
Hi tech@,
aren't these functions supposed to be static?
fritjof
Index: siphash.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/crypto/siphash.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1 siphash.c
--- siphash.c 4 Nov 2014 03:01:14 - 1.1
Hi tech@,
this diff removes the atoi(3) call from keynote(1).
fritjof
Index: keynote-keygen.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libkeynote/keynote-keygen.c,v
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -p -r1.21 keynote-keygen.c
---
Hi tech@,
looks like there are some missing periods regarding the sudo wrong
password messages.
fritjof
Index: ins_csops.h
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/sudo/ins_csops.h,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -p -r1.5 ins_csops.h
---
fritjof
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -p -r1.6 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 1 Dec 2014 21:58:46 - 1.6
+++ xmalloc.c 1 Dec 2014 23:59:50 -
@@ -60,7 +60,7
Hi tech,
it's NULL not NUL.
fritjof
Index: diff3.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/diff3.c,v
retrieving revision 1.33
diff -u -p -r1.33 diff3.c
--- diff3.c 4 Mar 2012 04:05:15 - 1.33
+++ diff3.c 29 Nov 2014
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 05:27:00AM -0800, Claus Assmann wrote:
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
it's NULL not NUL.
Not in this case...
NULL: is a pointer (usually 0)
NUL: is a character ('\0')
Ahh I see, thank you.
pgpMkIwf4S_cz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 04:53:28PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 02:22:25PM +0100, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech,
it's NULL not NUL.
You're touching a big controversy here. Many developers say that NUL is
the right term when rferring to chars
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:14:50PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 05:19:16PM +0100, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech,
like the XXX comment says, rcsnum_cmp() can be used instead of a *for* loop.
The following shows the original behavior:
$ co -r1.2 foo.txt,v
Hi tech,
like the XXX comment says, rcsnum_cmp() can be used instead of a *for* loop.
The following shows the original behavior:
$ co -r1.2 foo.txt,v
foo.txt,v -- foo.txt
revision 1.2
done
$ co -r1.1 foo.txt,v
foo.txt,v -- foo.txt
revision 1.1
done
$ co foo.txt,v
foo.txt,v -- foo.txt
Hi tech,
I think it's more readable if the usage() function pointer will always be
written the same way.
fritjof
Index: rlog.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/rlog.c,v
retrieving revision 1.69
diff -u -p -r1.69 rlog.c
---
Hi,
it's better to compare memcmp against 0, for clarity.
fritjof
Index: diff3.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/diff3.c,v
retrieving revision 1.33
diff -u -p -r1.33 diff3.c
--- diff3.c 4 Mar 2012 04:05:15 - 1.33
+0200, Fritjof Bornebusch
wrote:
Hi tech,
the OpenRCS rcs command produces the following output if -l and
-u is
used in the same command:
$ rcs -l1.1 -u1.1 foo.txt
RCS file: foo.txt,v
1.1 locked
1.1 unlocked
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 09:34:33AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 03:10:44AM -0400, Daniel Dickman wrote:
Fritjof, have you let the gnu rcs project know about the segfault?
Maybe see how they choose to fix things and then follow their lead?
That will only slow things
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 03:11:28PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 02:56:07PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 09:34:33AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 03:10:44AM -0400, Daniel Dickman wrote:
Fritjof, have you let
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 07:10:01PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
after usage() was called, there is no where you can go.
as suggested by otto@ and @nicm, the usage() functions are marked as
__dead.
fritjof
fritjof
Index: ci.c
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 06:41:25PM +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
Looks good but you have missed out ident.c and rcsprog.c
Ups, sorry.
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 11:19:29AM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 07:10:01PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi,
Hi
Hi tech,
the OpenRCS rcs command produces the following output if -l and -u is
used in the same command:
$ rcs -l1.1 -u1.1 foo.txt
RCS file: foo.txt,v
1.1 locked
1.1 unlocked
$ rcs -u1.1 -l1.1 foo.txt
RCS file: foo.txt,v
1.1 locked
1.1 unlocked
I've looked at GnuRCS and it has another way to
Hi,
there is no need for the typecast.
fritjof
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 7 Jun 2009 08:39:13 - 1.4
+++ xmalloc.c
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:31:17PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:13:47PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi,
I changed atoi to strtonum in order to avoid overflows.
One concern: atoi() does not mind trailing stuff, while strtonum()
does. Did you verify
Hi,
I changed atoi to strtonum in order to avoid overflows.
fritjof
Index: rcstime.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/rcstime.c,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 rcstime.c
--- rcstime.c 29 Apr 2014 07:44:19 -
On Sun, Aug 03, 2014 at 06:00:45PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping?
Hi tech,
the OpenRCS rcs command produces the following output if -l and -u is used in
the
same command:
$ rcs -l1.1 -u1.1 foo.txt
RCS file: foo.txt,v
1.1 locked
1.1 unlocked
$ rcs -u1.1 -l1.1 foo.txt
RCS
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:23:00PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping?
Hi tech,
there is an unnecessary typecast in xmalloc.c of rcs.
fritjof
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving
On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:35:43PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping?
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 08:03:58AM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
Half true. :)
The behavior is intended. I don't really know why they care about
freeing null, but the intention is clearly to check for it; otherwise
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:19:19PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping?
Hi tech,
remove the atoi calls, in order to avoid overflows.
fritjof
Index: rcstime.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/rcstime.c,v
retrieving
On Sun, Aug 03, 2014 at 02:56:25PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Ping?
Hi tech,
during my search after other xfree() implementations, I saw that xfree() in
sndiod is just a wrapper for free()
without any other conditions, like NULL check.
fritjof
Index: abuf.c
Hi tech,
during my search after other xfree() implementations, I saw that xfree() in
sndiod is just a wrapper for free()
without any other conditions, like NULL check.
fritjof
Index: abuf.c
===
RCS file:
Hi tech,
the OpenRCS rcs command produces the following output if -l and -u is used in
the
same command:
$ rcs -l1.1 -u1.1 foo.txt
RCS file: foo.txt,v
1.1 locked
1.1 unlocked
$ rcs -u1.1 -l1.1 foo.txt
RCS file: foo.txt,v
1.1 locked
1.1 unlocked
I've looked at GnuRCS and it has another way
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 08:03:58AM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
Half true. :)
The behavior is intended. I don't really know why they care about
freeing null, but the intention is clearly to check for it; otherwise
they would just call free() in the first place. (actually, i think the
rationale
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 09:26:54PM +0100, Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:19:19PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
+ tzone = (int)strtonum(h, -23, 23, errstr);
The explicit cast is not needed here.
That's maybe true, but I don't like implicit casts
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 07:37:29PM -0700, patrick keshishian wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:14:54PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech,
there is an unnecessary NULL check before calling free.
fritjof
Index: xmalloc.c
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:32:07AM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 07:37:29PM -0700, patrick keshishian wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:14:54PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech
Hi tech,
there is an unnecessary NULL check before calling free.
fritjof
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 7 Jun 2009 08:39:13 -
Hi tech,
remove the atoi calls, in order to avoid overflows.
fritjof
Index: rcstime.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/rcstime.c,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 rcstime.c
--- rcstime.c 29 Apr 2014 07:44:19 -
Hi tech,
there is an unnecessary typecast in xmalloc.c of rcs.
fritjof
Index: xmalloc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/xmalloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 xmalloc.c
--- xmalloc.c 7 Jun 2009 08:39:13 -
Am I wrong?
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 04:30:03PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech,
does this return makes any sense, because it's a void function and the return
is at the end of the function.
fritjof
Index: arc4random.c
Hi tech,
does this return makes any sense, because it's a void function and the return
is at the end of the function.
fritjof
Index: arc4random.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/crypt/arc4random.c,v
retrieving revision 1.30
diff
Hi tech,
I added some missing ; to the rlog out files, to make sure these tests don't
fail.
fritjof
Index: rlog-rflag2.out
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/regress/usr.bin/rcs/rlog-rflag2.out,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1
Hi tech,
if ci uses a user defined revision number the pointer was just set to NULL and
not freed correctly.
fritjof
Index: ci.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/ci.c,v
retrieving revision 1.216
diff -u -p -r1.216 ci.c
--- ci.c
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 08:59:03PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 08:05:35PM +0200, J??r??mie Courr??ges-Anglas wrote:
Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org writes:
[...]
Does no one want to check the diff and give me some feedback?
Regardless
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 12:35:11PM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
On 9 May 2014 11:47, Kenneth Westerback kwesterb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 May 2014 11:41, Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 08:59:03PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 06:01:52PM +0200, J??r??mie Courr??ges-Anglas wrote:
Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org writes:
Hi tech,
Hi,
if I compile rcs, gcc prints a few warnings like this:
- comparison between signed and unsigned
- signed and unsigned type in conditional
consistent what format is used, too.
fritjof
2014-05-08 0:13 GMT+02:00 Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org:
Hi tech,
I think labels = 3 is more readable than 3 = labels.
fritjof
Index: merge.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src
Hi tech,
there is no way you can go, after usage() was called, so dont't do it.
fritjof
Index: ci.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/ci.c,v
retrieving revision 1.216
diff -u -p -r1.216 ci.c
--- ci.c27 Oct 2013 18:31:24
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 10:57:57PM +0200, Fritjof Bornebusch wrote:
Hi tech,
if I compile rcs, gcc prints a few warnings like this:
- comparison between signed and unsigned
- signed and unsigned type in conditional expression
I'm not quite sure if the typecasts are at the correct place
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 08:05:35PM +0200, J??r??mie Courr??ges-Anglas wrote:
Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org writes:
[...]
Does no one want to check the diff and give me some feedback?
Regardless of the content of your diff, the date of your mail was:
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 22
Hi tech,
there are a few void casts in rcs. But I have a question about that.
Are these casts really necessary? I've read that the compiler warns, because of
unused variables.
But no compiler warnings about that on amd64.
That's why I just added this small diff, in order to get feedback if the
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:58:03PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
Hi Fritjof,
Fritjof Bornebusch wrote on Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:32:05PM +0200:
there are a few void casts in rcs. But I have a question about that.
Are these casts really necessary?
No, they are not necessary.
I've
Hi tech,
I think labels = 3 is more readable than 3 = labels.
fritjof
Index: merge.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/merge.c,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -p -r1.7 merge.c
--- merge.c 23 Jul 2010 21:46:05 - 1.7
Hi tech,
there are some never read values in rcs.
fritjof
Index: co.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/rcs/co.c,v
retrieving revision 1.117
diff -u -p -r1.117 co.c
--- co.c16 Apr 2013 20:24:45 - 1.117
+++ co.c
Hi tech,
this assignment is never read.
Fritjof
Index: collect.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/mail/collect.c,v
retrieving revision 1.34
diff -u -p -r1.34 collect.c
--- collect.c 17 Jan 2014 18:42:30 - 1.34
+++
Hi tech,
there are some set operations, which are never read.
Fritjof
Index: rcsparse.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/cvs/rcsparse.c,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -p -r1.7 rcsparse.c
--- rcsparse.c 3 Jun 2013 17:04:35 -
* Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org [2014-04-23 19:30]:
there are some set operations, which are never read.
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/cvs/rcsparse.c,v
guess we need to decide what to do with opencvs really. either
* Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org [2014-04-23 20:15]:
* Fritjof Bornebusch frit...@alokat.org [2014-04-23 19:30]:
there are some set operations, which are never read.
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/cvs
Hi tech,
there are some unread set operations in the ssh code.
Fritjof
Index: clientloop.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/ssh/clientloop.c,v
retrieving revision 1.258
diff -u -p -r1.258 clientloop.c
--- clientloop.c2 Feb
Hi tech,
it's Trojan horse not Trojan horsed, right?
Fritjof
Index: security.8
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man8/security.8,v
retrieving revision 1.23
diff -u -p -r1.23 security.8
--- security.8 20 Apr 2014 22:15:49 -
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
