From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 27 17:08:24 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B1BA4CD; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:08:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail107.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail107.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.53]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D14D3CF; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:08:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c122-106-147-133.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au (c122-106-147-133.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [122.106.147.133]) by mail107.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C24AD42AB3; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 04:08:21 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 04:08:20 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Kurt Jaeger Subject: Re: svn commit: r273734 - head/bin/dd In-Reply-To: <20141027162034.GN1492@f10.opsec.eu> Message-ID: <20141028040638.O3114@besplex.bde.org> References: <201410271138.s9RBcHrA002447@svn.freebsd.org> <20141028005225.S2013@besplex.bde.org> <20141027162034.GN1492@f10.opsec.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=dMCfxopb c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=7NqvjVvQucbO2RlWB8PEog==:117 a=PO7r1zJSAAAA:8 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=JzwRw_2MAAAA:8 a=Fzk3_7XD2FUfaiSXAJQA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Bruce Evans X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:08:24 -0000 On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >>> Log: >>> bin/dd: Fix incorrect casting of arguments > [...] >> Both of these work correctly in my version (with a relatively small patch >> and no breakage of other cases). (I actually typed large values as -1 >> and 11111111111111111111111111. -1 means (uintmax_t)-1 although this >> is undocumented and now broken). > > So, given this detailed review, should I revert the change ? Yes. You would have to change half of it just to get it to compile on 32-bit arches. Bruce