From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8892 invoked by alias); 10 Apr 2011 18:21:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 8883 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Apr 2011 18:21:11 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RFC_ABUSE_POST,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from qmta11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (HELO QMTA11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net) (76.96.59.211) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 18:21:07 +0000 Received: from omta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.19]) by QMTA11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id VuM51g0020QuhwU5BuM7iE; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 18:21:07 +0000 Received: from up.mrs.kithrup.com ([24.4.193.8]) by omta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id VuM51g00h0BKwT43NuM7Ad; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 18:21:07 +0000 Subject: Re: doubled words Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Mike Stump In-Reply-To: <87wrj2nwxq.fsf@rho.meyering.net> Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 18:21:00 -0000 Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <049035B4-BD2F-4351-A708-C2B7DAC048C4@comcast.net> References: <87wrj2nwxq.fsf@rho.meyering.net> To: Jim Meyering X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg00709.txt.bz2 On Apr 10, 2011, at 4:54 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: > I would be inclined to prepare a patch if I thought it would > be applied (promptly?), but I submitted a clear/simple fix for > an obvious double-free bug (albeit only in a test case) a month ago: >=20 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/85973/ > avoid memory overrun in a test leading to potential double-free > * testsuite/test-expandargv.c (writeout_test): Fix off-by-one error: > i.e., do copy the trailing NUL byte. >=20 > AFAIK, it hasn't been applied. If a "real" bug has such low priority, > this is not a good time to submit a clean-up change. So, my recommendation would be to treat each patch by itself. I know how y= ou feel. I've applied it as it was previous approved.