I checked in a different patch that just checks if STORE is NULL.
Thanks.
As your previous patch, this one did have whitespace instead tabs.
This breaks C-c C-a in emacs diff mode. Until I figured out how to
get emacs to ignore such whitespace problems (or somebody tells me
how ;)
At Sat, 13 Mar 2004 18:06:50 +0100 (MET),
ams wrote:
> Here is a new patch, that doesn't screw up the correct behaviour of
> storeread; and still fixes the wrong one (segfault when not passing
> any arguments to it)
I checked in a different patch that just checks if STORE is NULL.
As your previou
At Tue, 9 Mar 2004 06:08:36 +0100 (MET),
ams wrote:
>
> storeread segfaults if you don't pass a argument to it.
>
> hurd:/home/ams/hurd/hurd.obj/utils# storeread
> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
>
> The following patch fixes that, and it also updates the docstring a
> bit. It also makes store
storeread segfaults if you don't pass a argument to it.
hurd:/home/ams/hurd/hurd.obj/utils# storeread
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
The following patch fixes that, and it also updates the docstring a
bit. It also makes storeread barf if you pass it >3 arguments
(there is no
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> case ARGP_KEY_ARG:
> + if (state->arg_num > 2)
> + /* Too many arguments. */
> + argp_usage (state);
Is it my mail client or is the indentation incorrect? Perhaps the
weird output it is caused by the use of tabs. I assum
> case ARGP_KEY_ARG:
> + if (state->arg_num > 2)
> + /* Too many arguments. */
> + argp_usage (state);
Is it my mail client or is the indentation incorrect?
It should be a tab.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL
