On Tue, 2010-08-10, hwri...@apache.org wrote: > Author: hwright > Date: Tue Aug 10 20:59:29 2010 > New Revision: 984208 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=984208&view=rev > Log: > On the ignore-mergeinfo branch: > Fix a cast which was causing a segfault in stat test 32 as a result of the > merge in r984206. > > Modified: > subversion/branches/ignore-mergeinfo/subversion/libsvn_client/status.c > > Modified: > subversion/branches/ignore-mergeinfo/subversion/libsvn_client/status.c > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/ignore-mergeinfo/subversion/libsvn_client/status.c?rev=984208&r1=984207&r2=984208&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- subversion/branches/ignore-mergeinfo/subversion/libsvn_client/status.c > (original) > +++ subversion/branches/ignore-mergeinfo/subversion/libsvn_client/status.c > Tue Aug 10 20:59:29 2010 > @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ tweak_status(void *baton, > > if (ignore) > { > - ((svn_wc_status2_t *) status)->prop_status = svn_wc_status_normal; > + ((svn_wc_status3_t *) status)->prop_status = svn_wc_status_normal; > > if (!svn_wc__is_sendable_status(status, sb->no_ignore, > sb->get_all)) > return SVN_NO_ERROR;
I haven't looked fully, but is a cast really necessary? svn_wc__is_sendable_status() takes a (svn_wc_status3_t *) as its first param, so isn't 'status' already the right type? - Julian
