Josip Rodin writes:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 02:34:27PM -0700, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> >
> > > tags 392077 + patch
> > Bug#392077: joe: execmd with empty command results in SEGV
> > There were no tags set.
> > Bug#392304: joe: yet another segfault: alt/x enter segfault(loss of data)
> > Tags added: patch
>
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 16:25:52 -0500, Kevin Glynn wrote:
> > The attached patch to joe 3.5-1 just treats a blank command string
> > (i.e. empty or all whitespace) as an unknown command.
>
> Kevin, please Cc: the bug address when adding stuff, otherwise your mail is
> relegated to a footnote in the bug log.
>
Sorry, first time I tried to add a patch.
> I wonder, however, why this isn't handled by those bits:
>
> /* Do we have a command? */
> [...]
> if (!cmd) {
> *sta = -1;
> return NULL;
>
I believe we skip over this last statement because we are already at
the end of the buffer. The for loop finishes immediately and y still
equals x:
/* Do we have a command? */
else {
for (y = x; buf[y] && buf[y]!='#' && buf[y] != '!' &&
buf[y] != '~' && buf[y] !='-' && buf[y] != ',' &&
buf[y] != ' ' && buf[y] != '\t' &&
buf[y] != '\n' && buf[x] != '\r'; ++y) ;
if (y != x) {
[...]
if (!cmd) {
*sta = -1;
return NULL;
regards
Kevin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
