From owner-freebsd-bugs Sun Dec 30 5: 0:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B93A37B41D for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:00:11 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id fBUD0BU75289; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:00:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:00:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200112301300.fBUD0BU75289@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Sheldon Hearn Subject: Re: bin/32807: which utility replacement in C Reply-To: Sheldon Hearn Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR bin/32807; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Sheldon Hearn To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Peter Sanchez , freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/32807: which utility replacement in C Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 14:58:58 +0200 On 15 Dec 2001 00:42:07 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Yes, much better! Though the explicit "return" from void functions > isn't necessary. Since you've been driving the review process, will you don an asbestos suit and use this one to kill the existing perl script? :-) Note that there's a malloc() that isn't tested for failure, but it's hidden in a strdup(). This is in findprog(). Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message