In article <20180926124258.ga14...@homeworld.netbsd.org>, <m...@netbsd.org> wrote: >On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 04:32:03PM +1000, Simon Burge wrote: >> Should you be allowed to call dirname(3) on the results of a previous >> dirname(3) call? > >This is about minidlna, right? if it works, please feel free to add >SSP_SUPPORTED= no >to the makefile. > >it's a hack, but it'll give us the ability to continue discussing what >the correct solution is without users being affected by it.
Well, it will return the wrong results... so might as well change the memcpy to memmove? No? christos
