From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri May  9 16:36:49 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA06013
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 16:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA06004
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 9 May 1997 16:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1])
	by rah.star-gate.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA06620;
	Fri, 9 May 1997 16:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199705092336.QAA06620@rah.star-gate.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: Timothy Moore <moore@WOLFENET.com>
cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: g++ shared library segfaults 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 09 May 1997 16:25:05 PDT."
             <199705092325.QAA05646@gonzo.wolfenet.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 16:36:47 -0700
From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Tnks!

Here are the patches for Doc 8)

ftp://rah.star-gate.com/pub/iv-doc.patch

Can someone make sure that the patches  are correct . If doc and idraw 
proves to be reliable after a little testing then I suggest including
them in the next release of FreeBSD.

After further testing we can look into further extend / enhance doc and
idraw.


	Regards,
	Amancio

>From The Desk Of Timothy Moore :
>    Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 15:51:51 -0700
>    From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
> 
>    Hi,
> 
>    I traced it further more and it looks like a bug in Docviewer.c using 
>    an illegal reference to a local variable.
> 
>     for (long i = 0; i < count; ++i) {
> 	   ViewerColorInfo& info = _color_info->item_ref(i);
> 	   if (strcmp(info._name, name) == 0) {
> 	       break;
> 	   }
>        }
> 
>    later on it checks the value of i. I change the scope of i and doc just
>    fired right up. Will "fix" similar referencs in doc.
> 
> Uh, that's not an illegal reference.  The scope of i extends to the
> end of the containing block, not the end of the "for" statement.
> 
> Tim