On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 02:38:27PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >... > > > > trawick 02/05/17 07:58:27 > > > > > > > > Modified: strings apr_cpystrn.c > > > > Log: > > > > don't check for malloc() failure in our strdup() replacement >... > We have an callback for pool functions, often set to NULL, but none the less > we need to check or the segfault may occur in a less than obvious point.
It will fail right off the bat as we memcpy() the old string into the new. So it will be quite obvious in this case :-) > I'm not sure how the pool malloc failure callback works into this, or any > other > non-pool function. Perhaps we need a global malloc failure callback? > > We simply don't need to check the results of apr_fooalloc because this > callback > must have handled the condition. Here is a much simpler answer: simply nuke the strdup() replacement. Why do we need to supply strdup() ? We never use it. It isn't "our problem". We encourage people to use pools, not to use strdup() and other malloc-based APIs. Torch it and resolve the question immediately. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
