Ouch.
Theo de Raadt wrote on Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 09:40:57PM -0600:
> Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> the file ls/main.c is a joke.
>> Minus one file, minus 15 lines of code, no functional change.
>> OK?
> No, because commiting that would break the tree.
> Get ready for a shock.
Indeed: /usr/src/libex
> the file ls/main.c is a joke.
>
> Minus one file, minus 15 lines of code, no functional change.
>
> OK?
No, because commiting that would break the tree.
Get ready for a shock.
> Masao Uebayashi wrote on Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:16:35PM +0900:
>
> > ls(1) omits fts_close(3) after fts_open(3), resulting in an FD leak.
> > Found by Valgrind.
>
> As far as i can see, the code is correct, there doesn't seem to be
> a leak.
There is an ABI misuse; which creates what is a lea
Hi,
the file ls/main.c is a joke.
Minus one file, minus 15 lines of code, no functional change.
OK?
Ingo
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ls/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -p -r1.7 Makefile
--- Makefile
Hi,
Masao Uebayashi wrote on Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:16:35PM +0900:
> ls(1) omits fts_close(3) after fts_open(3), resulting in an FD leak.
> Found by Valgrind.
As far as i can see, the code is correct, there doesn't seem to be
a leak. The function traverse() is static and only called at the
ver
ls(1) omits fts_close(3) after fts_open(3), resulting in an FD leak.
Found by Valgrind.
Index: bin/ls/ls.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ls/ls.c,v
retrieving revision 1.40
diff -u -p -r1.40 ls.c
--- bin/ls/ls.c 18 Apr 2015 18:28:36 -
