Philip Martin <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> writes:
>> ==15116== Source and destination overlap in memcpy(0x9e3f078, 0x98aca80,
>> 160094512)
>> ==15116== at 0x4C25F6A: memcpy (mc_replace_strmem.c:497)
>> ==15116== by 0x5A25229: svn_string_ncreate (string.c:165)
>> ==15116== by 0x5A2541B: svn_string_dup (string.c:224)
>> ==15116== by 0x5A1650C: svn_prop_diffs (properties.c:225)
>> ==15116== by 0x513DE67: set_props_txn (wc_db.c:5139)
>> ==15116== by 0x515F337: run_txn (wc_db_util.c:188)
>> ==15116== by 0x5A1F9FA: svn_sqlite__with_lock (sqlite.c:1073)
>> ==15116== by 0x515F3AD: svn_wc__db_with_txn (wc_db_util.c:210)
>> ==15116== by 0x513E17A: svn_wc__db_op_set_props (wc_db.c:5189)
>> ==15116== by 0x510DB3C: do_propset (props.c:1941)
>> ==15116== by 0x510E15D: svn_wc_prop_set4 (props.c:2073)
>> ==15116== by 0x4E3AAB2: add_file (add.c:327)
>> ==15116==
>
> I assume this is the problem and that copying overlapping memory is
> causing corruption to the pools and/or the malloc structures:
This makes the test PASS:
Index: ../src/subversion/libsvn_client/add.c
===================================================================
--- ../src/subversion/libsvn_client/add.c (revision 1401908)
+++ ../src/subversion/libsvn_client/add.c (working copy)
@@ -146,8 +146,8 @@
const char *filename,
const char *pattern,
apr_hash_t *propvals,
- apr_pool_t *scratch_pool,
- apr_pool_t *result_pool)
+ apr_pool_t *result_pool,
+ apr_pool_t *scratch_pool)
{
apr_hash_index_t *hi;
@@ -163,7 +163,7 @@
const char *propname = svn__apr_hash_index_key(hi);
const char *propval = svn__apr_hash_index_val(hi);
svn_string_t *propval_str = apr_palloc(result_pool,
- sizeof(*propval));
+ sizeof(*propval_str));
propval_str->data = propval;
propval_str->len = strlen(propval);
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@
apr_pool_t *scratch_pool)
{
apr_hash_index_t *hi;
- svn_boolean_t have_executable;
+ svn_boolean_t have_executable = FALSE;
*properties = apr_hash_make(result_pool);
*mimetype = NULL;
--
Join us this October at Subversion Live 2012
http://www.wandisco.com/svn-live-2012
