[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Another proposed patch
From: |
pg |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev Another proposed patch |
Date: |
Sun, 22 Nov 1998 08:38:41 -0700 (MST) |
In a recent note, address@hidden said:
> Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 07:40:01 -0500 (EST)
>
> > This one is more serious - it is an attempt to fix a crash. However, I
> > am uncertain of the ramifications of the particular strings I have chosen.
> > The problem is that in certain cases, the address was null, so the fprintf
> > was crashing.
>
I reported this phenomenon and proposed a comparable patch in:
Linkname: lynx-dev Safety Belt
URL: http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/month1198/msg00435.html
* Subject: lynx-dev Safety Belt
* From: address@hidden
* Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 15:32:55 -0700 (MST)
A few weeks ago, I carelessly defined a null macro in
config.hin. This percolated into lynx_cfg.h, thence into
cfg_defs.h, where it had been transformed into a VOID member
in a struct initializer. It took me several hours to track
down the SIGSEGV every time I pressed "=". Today, I did it
again, but it took me less than an hour to recall what had
happened the last time.
> I agree that it's a potential hole: but which configuration does this?
Will "configure", operating properly, ever generate a null macro
definition, such as:
#define inline
in a configuration that doesn't support "inline"?
> Perhaps the problem is upstream, and we should not have a null pointer
> in the first place. I'd like to know - so we can see if this should be
> applied to the 2.8.1 bugfixes.
>
It might better be fixed upstream in cfg_defs.sh, but I hadn't
the fortitude.
-- gil
Re: lynx-dev Another proposed patch,
pg <=