Gleydson Soares(gsoa...@gmail.com) on 2017.03.27 16:43:28 -0300:
> > What about the other calls to calloc(3); shouldn't we keep their
> > respective error messages consistent?
>
> seems that several err()/errx() calls in pfctl code are hard-coding
> the function name...
>
> instead of hard code,
Hi,
Gleydson Soares wrote on Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 04:43:28PM -0300:
> instead of hard code, maybe those calls should be changed to:
> errx(1, "%s: anystring", __func__)
the usual OpenBSD idiom is
if ((p = malloc(size)) == NULL)
err(1, NULL);
see EXAMPLES in malloc(3), s
> What about the other calls to calloc(3); shouldn't we keep their
> respective error messages consistent?
seems that several err()/errx() calls in pfctl code are hard-coding
the function name...
instead of hard code, maybe those calls should be changed to:
errx(1, "%s: anystring", __func__)
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 07:39:09PM +0200, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
i commited a err(1, "calloc") instead.
What about the other calls to calloc(3); shouldn't we keep their
respective error messages consistent?
Klemens Nanni(k...@posteo.org) on 2017.03.25 12:39:48 +0100:
> Index: pfctl.c
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/pfctl/pfctl.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.338
> diff -u -p -r1.338 pfctl.c
> --- pfctl.c 26 Jan 2017 08:24:34 - 1.
Index: pfctl.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/pfctl/pfctl.c,v
retrieving revision 1.338
diff -u -p -r1.338 pfctl.c
--- pfctl.c 26 Jan 2017 08:24:34 - 1.338
+++ pfctl.c 25 Mar 2017 11:37:01 -
@@ -753,7 +753,7 @@ pfctl
