On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Federico G. Schwindt <fg...@lodoss.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:12:43AM -0800, patrick keshishian wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Federico G. Schwindt <fg...@lodoss.net> >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 05:13:44PM -0800, patrick keshishian wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Federico G. Schwindt <fg...@lodoss.net> >> >> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 03:15:11PM -0800, patrick keshishian wrote: >> >> >> http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=129372769129646&w=2 >> >> >> >> >> >> I never got any replies of "yes", "maybe", "you are out of your >> >> >> freaking mind", etc. >> >> > >> >> > ?what about something like this: >> >> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=300289? >> >> > ?looks simpler imho. >> >> >> >> The libhfsp/src/swab.h source on debian link seems different than what >> >> I see in hfsplus_1.0.4.src.tar.bz2 (just downloaded). >> >> >> >> MD5 (hfsplus_1.0.4.src.tar.bz2) = 18fa1efb5432469357ffa6bfa7c08fcd >> >> size: 185461 >> >> >> >> >> >> Either way, I don't think the dabian patch is correct; at least not >> >> entirely. They propose: >> >> >> >> -#define bswabU16_inc(ptr) (*((UInt16*) (ptr))++) >> >> +#define bswabU16_inc(ptr) ptr = (UInt16*)ptr + 1 >> >> >> >> which will change the following (from btree.c): >> >> >> >> ? ? node->num_rec ? = bswabU16_inc(p); >> >> ? ? node->reserved ?= bswabU16_inc(p); >> >> >> >> to: >> >> ? ? node->num_rec ? = p = (UInt16*)p + 1; >> >> ? ? node->reserved ?= p = (UInt16*)p +1; >> >> >> >> I seriously doubt this is the intent of the original code. >> > >> > ?ok, assuming they wanted "*p; *p++" i believe you can do: >> >> No. The intent is: >> >> some_integer_type = *(some_integer_type*)p; >> p = (some_interger_type*)p + sizeof(some_integer_type); > > sorry, that's what i meant (as opposed to p = p + 1) and the code below > should do that.
Nope. What your macro does is "*p; (*p)++". --patrick > f.- > >> > #define bswabU16_inc(ptr) ?((*((UInt16*)(ptr)))++) >> > >> > ?and will give you the right result. >> > >> > ?f.- >> > >
