From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13505 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2003 03:09:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 13485 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2003 03:09:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO phumblet.no-ip.org) (68.160.7.143) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Nov 2003 03:09:23 -0000 Received: from [192.168.1.156] (helo=hpn5170x) by phumblet.no-ip.org with smtp (Exim 4.24) id HNT5UW-0035LZ-HE for cygwin@cygwin.com; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 22:32:08 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20031103211959.00829450@incoming.verizon.net> X-Sender: vze1u1tg@incoming.verizon.net Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 03:09:00 -0000 To: cygwin@cygwin.com From: "Pierre A. Humblet" Subject: Re: Segmentation Fault of ssh3.7.1 with cygwin1.5.5-1 in W95 In-Reply-To: <20031103190632.GL18706@cygbert.vinschen.de> References: <20031103183956.GA223527@Worldnet> <3.0.5.32.20031031190541.00826670@incoming.verizon.net> <3.0.5.32.20031030202558.00828400@incoming.verizon.net> <3.0.5.32.20031029214604.0082b8c0@incoming.verizon.net> <200310291905.h9TJ5eG5028353@pion.ivic.ve> <3.0.5.32.20031029214604.0082b8c0@incoming.verizon.net> <3.0.5.32.20031030202558.00828400@incoming.verizon.net> <3.0.5.32.20031031190541.00826670@incoming.verizon.net> <3.0.5.32.20031102094314.00839710@incoming.verizon.net> <20031103163115.GH18706@cygbert.vinschen.de> <20031103183956.GA223527@Worldnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00120.txt.bz2 At 08:06 PM 11/3/2003 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 01:39:56PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 05:31:15PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> > >> > I see. I'll create a patch. >> >> I started one already, must still compile and test. >> Let me know if you proceed on your side. > >I have a patch ready and it seems to work fine(tm). Would you mind >to give it a try on 95? Patch below. Turns out your patch is identical to mine (there is no need to initialize protolen), and it worked on Win95, but a few things trouble me in the reused code: 1) The test "IsBadReadPtr (src->s_proto ..." will unduly fail on Win95 if the 16 lsb of the first alias address are the 16 msb of a readable memory address. I don't see why that's impossible. If would safer to have a wincap entry, or (horror !), testing wincap.osname (). 2) The test "&& !IsBadReadPtr (((pservent *) src) " should never fail when it is reached, but should it fail, s_proto would be assigned an invalid address and the program would crash. So if that test is kept it should be part of a if .. else if .. (leaving s_proto NULL). 3) Strictly speaking, we should use IsBadStringPtr.. Pierre -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/