[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[patch #3329] -1 is cast to uint32_t instead of store_offset_t
From: |
Marcus Brinkmann |
Subject: |
[patch #3329] -1 is cast to uint32_t instead of store_offset_t |
Date: |
Mon, 08 Nov 2004 11:42:39 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040413 Galeon/1.3.15 (Debian package 1.3.15-2) |
This mail is an automated notification from the patch tracker
of the project: The GNU Hurd.
/**************************************************************************/
[patch #3329] Latest Modifications:
Changes by:
Marcus Brinkmann <marcus@gnu.org>
'Date:
Mon 11/08/04 at 16:36 (Europe/Berlin)
What | Removed | Added
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category | None | Ext2 filesystem
Resolution | None | Applied
Assigned to | None | marcus
Status | Open | Closed
------------------ Additional Follow-up Comments ----------------------------
Applied the patch, good catch! Does this fix an actual bug?
I am a bit worried there may be more of such off64_t issues. I hope not, but I
didn't check thoroughly.
/**************************************************************************/
[patch #3329] Full Item Snapshot:
URL: <http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?func=detailitem&item_id=3329>
Project: The GNU Hurd
Submitted by: Ognyan Kulev
On: Wed 09/01/04 at 06:50
Category: Ext2 filesystem
Priority: 5 - Normal
Resolution: Applied
Privacy: Public
Assigned to: marcus
Originator Email:
Status: Closed
Summary: -1 is cast to uint32_t instead of store_offset_t
Original Submission: Conditional operator ?: wants 2nd and 3rd arguments to be
of the same type. So the following use:
run->start = block ?: -1;
implicitly casts -1 to uint32_t, but it should be cast to store_offset_t.
Follow-up Comments
------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 11/08/04 at 16:36 By: Marcus Brinkmann <marcus>
Applied the patch, good catch! Does this fix an actual bug?
I am a bit worried there may be more of such off64_t issues. I hope not, but I
didn't check thoroughly.
File Attachments
-------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 09/01/04 at 06:50 Name: storeinfo.patch Size: 779B By: ogi
http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/download.php?item_id=3329&item_file_id=3624
For detailed info, follow this link:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?func=detailitem&item_id=3329>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- [patch #3329] -1 is cast to uint32_t instead of store_offset_t,
Marcus Brinkmann <=