https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18880
Marcel de Rooy <m.de.r...@rijksmuseum.nl> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|BLOCKED |Failed QA --- Comment #16 from Marcel de Rooy <m.de.r...@rijksmuseum.nl> --- Just reading commit cfc484b17 and this patch, I think that we do not completely recover the regression described. Formerly, a return 0; was issued in a number of cases. Now this patch assigns @return=() instead of (0). Both approaches are not bug free. Although we already know that we should return false, we are going to call checkpw_internal now since @return is empty! We should not. After calling checkpw_internal, @return is changed and the actual results may vary. The problem of the regression is in the older commit is here: return ( $retval, $retcard, $retuserid ) is not necessarily the same as return @return If we evaluate in scalar context, return @return will return the number of list elements while return (...) returns the last element (here retuserid). Welcome to Perl :) Evaluation in list context will be the same. So when @return was (0), return @return did not return a 0 but did return a 1 in scalar context !! Apparently, the external authentifications broken called this routine in scalar context. I would say that we also (at least theoretically) need to address these calls since they probably relied on $retuserid instead of $retval ! Which in practice might not be a problem btw.. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/