On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:30:24AM -0700, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
On Mar 23, 2010, at 06:48, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Guys, if you ask me, introducing all this additional complecity just
to placate a static analysis tool is starting to get a bit silly.
How about just putting a comment in
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 01:49:35AM +0100, ext Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
I was thinking smaller would be more acceptable ... but I too would
prefer something like OsRandom() in os/utils.c ... is that something
that should be exported to drivers or just internal to the server?
Not sure if
From: Yann Droneaud ydrone...@mandriva.com
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:05:22 +0100
Le lundi 22 mars 2010 à 17:49 -0700, Jeremy Huddleston a écrit :
I was thinking smaller would be more acceptable ... but I too would
prefer something like OsRandom() in os/utils.c ...
I would prefer
On Mar 23, 2010, at 06:48, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Guys, if you ask me, introducing all this additional complecity just
to placate a static analysis tool is starting to get a bit silly.
How about just putting a comment in the code that the usage of rand()
is not security related at all and
Mainly to shut up clang. These are not security-sensitive uses of rand()
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston jerem...@apple.com
---
configure.ac|2 +-
dix/window.c| 18 ++
exa/exa_glyphs.c|8
include/dix-config.h.in |3 +++
4
Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
Mainly to shut up clang. These are not security-sensitive uses of rand()
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston jerem...@apple.com
---
configure.ac|2 +-
dix/window.c| 18 ++
exa/exa_glyphs.c|8
I was thinking smaller would be more acceptable ... but I too would
prefer something like OsRandom() in os/utils.c ... is that something
that should be exported to drivers or just internal to the server?
On Mar 22, 2010, at 13:51, Tiago Vignatti wrote:
Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
Mainly to
