On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 06:50, joshua stein wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Mar 2023 at 06:41:50 +1100, Darren Tucker wrote:
> > This seems to be one too many parens? ie
> > if (negate = (attrib[0] == '!'))
>
> clang warns if there's not the extra set of parens in case it's an
> accidental = instead of ==
On Thu, 9 Mar 2023, Darren Tucker wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 02:09, joshua stein wrote:
> > cppcheck found these, are they worth fixing?
> >
> > In the non-fail case, done is set to NULL and then free()d.
> > free(NULL) is legal but maybe worth removing?
>
> ssh uses this pattern a lot, a
On Thu, 09 Mar 2023 at 06:41:50 +1100, Darren Tucker wrote:
> > + if ((negate = (attrib[0] == '!')))
>
> This seems to be one too many parens? ie
> if (negate = (attrib[0] == '!'))
clang warns if there's not the extra set of parens in case it's an
accidental = instead of ==.
On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 02:09, joshua stein wrote:
> cppcheck found these, are they worth fixing?
>
> In the non-fail case, done is set to NULL and then free()d.
> free(NULL) is legal but maybe worth removing?
ssh uses this pattern a lot, and I agree with millert that it's not
worth changing.
char
On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 09:02:08 -0600, joshua stein wrote:
> In the non-fail case, done is set to NULL and then free()d.
> free(NULL) is legal but maybe worth removing?
Please leave this as-is. I don't think it is worth appeasing
cppcheck in this case.
> diff --git usr.bin/ssh/scp.c usr.bin/ssh/
cppcheck found these, are they worth fixing?
In the non-fail case, done is set to NULL and then free()d.
free(NULL) is legal but maybe worth removing?
diff --git usr.bin/ssh/scp.c usr.bin/ssh/scp.c
index f0f09bba623..acb7bd8a8a1 100644
--- usr.bin/ssh/scp.c
+++ usr.bin/ssh/scp.c
@@ -935,19 +93
