Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 16:09:21 +0200 From: Adrian Steinmann <ast@marabu.ch> To: Ganbold <ganbold@micom.mng.net> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, dougb@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/94767: [patch] rcorder(8) dumps core when does not use a proper RCng script (dansguardian) Message-ID: <B7A23617-C836-46F1-BE61-E3435A3347B0@marabu.ch> In-Reply-To: <44279BAC.4020904@micom.mng.net> References: <20060325180630.V31295@pano.marabu.ch> <44279BAC.4020904@micom.mng.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 27, 2006, at 10:00, Ganbold wrote: > I tested your test script and found out the way to avoid core dump > in rcorder. > I didn't quite get the #if 0 lines that you provide in patch. well, my #if 0 was just a way to "comment out" those free() calls... I didn't check Dragonfly but simply suspected freeing too early. It was a mistake to leave that in for the PR, it was just a local test. > So I'm bit confused here which type of patch we should apply. > I guess we should follow Dragonfly. Maybe I' wrong. > Can somebody enlighten me here? It seems there was a "cleanup" in rcorder.c lately, and maybe those introduced the bugs. But commenting (or #ifdef-ing out) those free()'s is probably better than having rcorder dump core. I just reworked my solution not to use rcorder but tsort... I know that doesn't help here, sorry. Adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B7A23617-C836-46F1-BE61-E3435A3347B0>