On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Julian Foad <julianf...@btopenworld.com> wrote: > Ivan Zhakov wrote: > >> Bert Huijben wrote: >>> i...@apache.org wrote: >>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1496434 >>>> Log: >>>> * subversion/svn/svn.c >>>> (svn_cl__check_cancel): Validate passed cancel baton for better test >>>> coverage. > >>>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/svn.c >>>> @@ -1651,6 +1651,8 @@ signal_handler(int signum) >>>> svn_error_t * >>>> svn_cl__check_cancel(void *baton) >>>> { >>>> + /* Cancel baton should be always NULL in command line client. */ >>>> + SVN_ERR_ASSERT(baton == NULL); >>>> if (cancelled) >>>> return svn_error_create(SVN_ERR_CANCELLED, NULL, _("Caught signal")); >>>> else >>> >>> Nice fix. >>> I was thinking about adding this last weekend when I noticed the problem >>> on dev@s.a.o. > > The code looks good but I don't understand the log message. We don't normally > describe input validation as adding better "test coverage". Did you have > something > more specific in mind? What problem on dev@ is this related to? > It's not input validation. We were passing invalid cancel baton and found this issue only in TortoiseSVN. See r1495850: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=r1495850 http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2013-06/0543.shtml
-- Ivan Zhakov CTO | VisualSVN | http://www.visualsvn.com
