Re: Remove useless NULL casts from mv(1)

2015-09-14 Thread Philip Guenther
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Michael McConville wrote: ... > - execl(_PATH_CP, "cp", "-PRp", "--", from, to, (char *)NULL); > + execl(_PATH_CP, "cp", "-PRp", "--", from, to, NULL); Nope, this is a case in C where the cast is

Re: Remove useless NULL casts from mv(1)

2015-09-14 Thread Michael McConville
Nicholas Marriott wrote: > These used to be necessary but now that NULL is (void *)0 they > aren't. > > I'd be inclined to keep them anyway - with the cast it is clearly not a > bug, without is not so clear. There are also loads of them and it'd be a > lot of churn to fix them all, for no real

Re: Remove useless NULL casts from mv(1)

2015-09-14 Thread Nicholas Marriott
These used to be necessary but now that NULL is (void *)0 they aren't. I'd be inclined to keep them anyway - with the cast it is clearly not a bug, without is not so clear. There are also loads of them and it'd be a lot of churn to fix them all, for no real advantage. But I don't feel strongly

Remove useless NULL casts from mv(1)

2015-09-14 Thread Michael McConville
Index: mv.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/mv/mv.c,v retrieving revision 1.40 diff -u -p -r1.40 mv.c --- mv.c24 Aug 2015 00:10:59 - 1.40 +++ mv.c14 Sep 2015 13:38:13 - @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ copy(char *from, char

Re: Remove useless NULL casts from mv(1)

2015-09-14 Thread Ted Unangst
Michael McConville wrote: > Index: mv.c > === > RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/mv/mv.c,v > retrieving revision 1.40 > diff -u -p -r1.40 mv.c > --- mv.c 24 Aug 2015 00:10:59 - 1.40 > +++ mv.c 14 Sep 2015 13:38:13 - > @@

Re: Remove useless NULL casts from mv(1)

2015-09-14 Thread Theo de Raadt
>Michael McConville wrote: >> Index: mv.c >> === >> RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/mv/mv.c,v >> retrieving revision 1.40 >> diff -u -p -r1.40 mv.c >> --- mv.c 24 Aug 2015 00:10:59 - 1.40 >> +++ mv.c 14 Sep 2015 13:38:13 -

Re: Remove useless NULL casts from mv(1)

2015-09-14 Thread Theo de Raadt
>These used to be necessary but now that NULL is (void *)0 they >aren't. > >I'd be inclined to keep them anyway - with the cast it is clearly not a >bug, without is not so clear. There are also loads of them and it'd be a >lot of churn to fix them all, for no real advantage. But I don't feel