Oh, btw., please http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR
On Aug 20 13:19, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Aug 20 18:23, Haojun Bao wrote: > > Great. In fact, I also found this code myself might cause problem in path.h: > > (we should test if path is NULL, and free it before the memcpy, and > > other member pointers should also be checked and free-ed first, is it > > about right?:-) > > Yes and no. It might look cleaner to free the pointers at this point > if they are non-NULL, but in fact the operator= is called after the > path_conv content has been memcpy'ed to another fhandler. So, if you > free the pointers, you free the pointers of another file descriptor. > SEGV's galore! ...which means, path_conv::operator= should only be called for uninitialized fhandlers. It would be a bug in Cygwin if it's called on an already initialized fhandler (with the well known result). Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
