No I have not been able to isolate it, but I will try to set up a script
to force the bug out of hiding on a regular basis... Give me a while
though
thanks,
Daniel S
On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 17:01, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 01:46 16/08/2003, php wrote:
> >Zeev,
> >
> >If you needed I could give
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> zval *tmp;
>
> ALLOC_ZVAL(tmp);
> *tmp = *value;
> zval_copy_ctor(tmp);
> INIT_PZVAL(tmp);
Aha, that makes my little ovl example work. Which means I must be messing
up my zval in my much more complex example myself.
Thanks.
-Rasmus
--
PHP Internals -
> It's supposed to change it only for the life of the current request. I'm
> saying 'supposed' because there have been sporadic reports about this not
> working properly, and changes that 'leak' and somehow persist across
> requests. I still haven't been able to see that in my own eyes, though :I
At 01:50 16/08/2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > You can't (reliably) connect to zval's that are passed to the setter
> > callback in ZE1, as they're not necessarily reference counted. If
you want
> > to retain t
At 01:38 16/08/2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> You can't (reliably) connect to zval's that are passed to the setter
> callback in ZE1, as they're not necessarily reference counted. If you want
> to retain them, you have to duplicate them (using zval_copy_ctor
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > You can't (reliably) connect to zval's that are passed to the setter
> > callback in ZE1, as they're not necessarily reference counted. If you want
> > to retain them, you have to duplicate them (using zval_
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> You can't (reliably) connect to zval's that are passed to the setter
> callback in ZE1, as they're not necessarily reference counted. If you want
> to retain them, you have to duplicate them (using zval_copy_ctor()).
> array(1,2,3) is a temporary value th
At 09:39 15/08/2003, Mark Morley wrote:
In the custom mass hosting module I'm working on I make calls to
zend_alter_ini_entry
(thanks Uwe!) to dynamically change PHP settings for each virtual
host. Works great,
but I'm wondering about the scope of this function.
If I change a setting, does that
At 01:10 16/08/2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Did the overloading API in PHP4 actually ever work?
Yep.
I have done some
simple stuff with it in the past, but I tried using it for something real
today and it is falling over. I have a very simple example extension
which illustrates it. See http://l
Did the overloading API in PHP4 actually ever work? I have done some
simple stuff with it in the past, but I tried using it for something real
today and it is falling over. I have a very simple example extension
which illustrates it. See http://lerdorf.com/ovl.tar.gz
For the lazy, here is the m
Marcus BöRger wrote:
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 11:20:52 PM, you wrote:
MA> Marcus Börger wrote:
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:47:41 PM, you wrote:
MA> Marcus Börger wrote:
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:22:28 PM, you wrote:
MA> >>I'm in php-src/ext/sta
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 11:20:52 PM, you wrote:
MA> Marcus Börger wrote:
>> Hello Mehdi,
>>
>> Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:47:41 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> MA> Marcus Börger wrote:
>>
>>
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:22:28 PM, you wrote:
MA> >>I'm i
Marcus Börger wrote:
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:47:41 PM, you wrote:
MA> Marcus Börger wrote:
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:22:28 PM, you wrote:
MA> >>I'm in php-src/ext/standard/image.c (revision 1.92)
Looking at php_image_type_to_mime it seems like there are tw
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:47:41 PM, you wrote:
MA> Marcus Börger wrote:
>> Hello Mehdi,
>>
>> Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:22:28 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> MA> >>I'm in php-src/ext/standard/image.c (revision 1.92)
>>
>Looking at php_image_type_to_mime it seems like there are two
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Jason Greene wrote:
> Apparently there seems to be a bug in SUNs compiler when a static inline
> function calls a inline function. This simple patch fixes the problem.
Thanks, I have applied the patch.
> I would have applied it myself, but I must have lost karma due
> to
Marcus Börger wrote:
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:22:28 PM, you wrote:
MA> >>I'm in php-src/ext/standard/image.c (revision 1.92)
Looking at php_image_type_to_mime it seems like there are two constants
not handled :
IMAGETYPE_JB2
IMAGETYPE_JPX
Am I looking at the good version of
Hello Mehdi,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 10:22:28 PM, you wrote:
MA> >>I'm in php-src/ext/standard/image.c (revision 1.92)
>>>Looking at php_image_type_to_mime it seems like there are two constants
>>>not handled :
>>> IMAGETYPE_JB2
>>> IMAGETYPE_JPX
>>>
>>>Am I looking at the good version of
>>I'm in php-src/ext/standard/image.c (revision 1.92)
Looking at php_image_type_to_mime it seems like there are two constants
not handled :
IMAGETYPE_JB2
IMAGETYPE_JPX
Am I looking at the good version of the C file ?
Yes.
Shouldn't be corrected ?
didou
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Develo
Apparently there seems to be a bug in SUNs compiler when a static inline
function calls a inline function. This simple patch fixes the problem. I
would have applied it myself, but I must have lost karma due to the cvs
reorgs
-Jason
--
Jason Greene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECT
> $do = DB_DataObject::factory('test');
> $do->birthday = null;
> $do->find();
>
> to do
> SELECT * FROM test WHERE birthday IS NULL;
>
> but since there was no effective way to detect null, as apposed to
> unset.. I had to give up... - If this could be solved by
> variable_exists() - even thoug
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu na mensagem
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> You can avoid the notice by doing if(isset($var) && !is_null($var)) { }
>
> We can't have a function for every piece of code.
>
IMHO, a function to test if a variable exists or not is not "every piece of
code". See what is necessary
"Mehdi Achour" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi all,
Yo Mehdi
>
> I'm in php-src/ext/standard/image.c (revision 1.92)
> Looking at php_image_type_to_mime it seems like there are two constants
> not handled :
>IMAGETYPE_JB2
>IMAGETYPE_JPX
>
> Am I
Hi all,
I'm in php-src/ext/standard/image.c (revision 1.92)
Looking at php_image_type_to_mime it seems like there are two constants
not handled :
IMAGETYPE_JB2
IMAGETYPE_JPX
Am I looking at the good version of the C file ?
didou
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To un
I guess I can take a peek, but to get ramped up on the entire php engine
might take longer than just waiting for a fix to become available.
Maybe, because this is the only bug that seems to be causing problems on
my server(s) at this time it is the most important :) This bug seems to
have been ope
At 12:36 15/08/2003, Thies C. Arntzen wrote:
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 07:41:48AM +0800, Alan Knowles wrote:
> I hit this a couple of months ago.. trying to implement NULL
> support in dataobjects:
>
> $do = DB_DataObject::factory('test');
> $do->get(12);
> $do->birthday = null;
> $do->update();
>
>
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Derick Rethans wrote:
> I'm going to restore this backup, as we lost too many data, and people
> are already updating the DB again.
Okay, the backup of the bug database is restored. If people closed bugs
in the last day, please check if they have the corrrect status in the
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 07:41:48AM +0800, Alan Knowles wrote:
> I hit this a couple of months ago.. trying to implement NULL
> support in dataobjects:
>
> $do = DB_DataObject::factory('test');
> $do->get(12);
> $do->birthday = null;
> $do->update();
>
> was supposed to generate
> SELECT * FROM te
> Wasn't addslashes() designed to escape shell commands and
> mysql_escape_string() for MySQL queries?
That's right.
Ard
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 11:19:47AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> 'SELECT ... WHERE id='. (int)$id
Even shorter :
'SELECT ... WHERE id='. $id+0
> 'SELECT ... WHERE name=" '.addslashes($name).' " '
Wasn't addslashes() designed to escape shell commands and
mysql_escape_string() for MySQL qu
> The problem is string compositing SQL queries. With a SQL command
> builder interface, query hacks don't occur. Right now, string
> compositing mysql queries with unvalidated input often results in just
> minor bugs, as from what I hear the mysql extention can't do chained
> queries yet, so the
This one time, at band camp, "Steven Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll let it drop, but I think your views will result in dangerous
> interfaces and I hope you reconsider. If you enable chained queries in
> the mysql extension as-is for example, it will enable a massive flood of
> hacking.
"Walt Boring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Stefan Walk wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 11:15:51AM -0700, walt boring wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I for one would like to see something like variable_exists(), as I am
> >>very annoyed with
> >>the logic of isset(
Hello php,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 9:02:28 AM, you wrote:
p> I'm just trying to get a possible ETA on when and if somebody is going
p> to look into the bug #23580 (detail below) a bit more. This bug is
p> beginning to cause me a whole lot of pain, and if nobody else was
p> looking at this maybe
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Steven Brown wrote:
> > I found an example of passing unvalidated input into a SQL query, I
> > didn't say it would lead to an exploit. The point was, yes, even you
> > guys make this mistake. It's not a "Well, you should have lea
Hello Steven,
Friday, August 15, 2003, 8:54:53 AM, you wrote:
SB> Btw, it's also never adequate validation to let users inject their own
SB> SQL, even in a SELECT. They might add impossibly complex stuff to the
SB> where clause and cause your database to wedge for days, or add a 'or 1 =
SB> 1'
I'm just trying to get a possible ETA on when and if somebody is going
to look into the bug #23580 (detail below) a bit more. This bug is
beginning to cause me a whole lot of pain, and if nobody else was
looking at this maybe I could take a stab at it?
--- Bug #23580 -
23580 Open Rando
36 matches
Mail list logo
