https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=376956
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |philippe.waroquiers@skynet.
| |be
--- Comment #1 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
There should be no difference of behaviour between Pascal runtime calling
access and a C application calling access.
Can you run your small C application under memheck with
--trace-syscalls=yes
and give the relevant trace portion for the 'access' syscalls ?
Then similarly run the pascal application.
Thanks
On my side, running the below C code gives as trace:
SYSCALL[6688,1](21) sys_access ( 0x400614(/dev/null), 0 )[sync] -->
Success(0x0)
SYSCALL[6688,1](21) sys_access ( 0x0((null)), 0 )==6688== Syscall param
access(pathname) points to unaddressable byte(s)
==6688== at 0x4F0EC57: access (syscall-template.S:81)
==6688== by 0x400578: main (sys_access.c:6)
access /dev/null 0
access NULL -1
which seems all ok to me.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
main()
{
printf("access /dev/null %d\n", access("/dev/null", 0));
printf("access NULL %d\n", access(NULL, 0));
}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
