[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-wget] [PATCH] Regression since wget 1.10: no_prefix function is
Re: [Bug-wget] [PATCH] Regression since wget 1.10: no_prefix function is *bad*
Sun, 12 May 2013 21:50:48 +0200
KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.8-1-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; )
Am Sonntag, 12. Mai 2013 schrieb Giuseppe Scrivano:
> Tim Rühsen <address@hidden> writes:
> > having an abort() without a message is simply a big waste of time for any
> > developer who stumbles upon it.
> I disagree here, what is so difficult that a debugger cannot catch? On
> the other hand, I agree this can be improved.
> > Since the init code of Wget has to be rewritten anyways, i provide the
> > solution right now: increasing the buffer size and printing a message
> > Wget aborts.
> > And yes, the whole issue is hell stupid...
> > - static char buffer;
> > + static char buffer;
> This won't really fix the problem of having a static buffer, the real
> fix would be to dynamically allocate the memory.
Yes, as I wrote, it is a quick hack.
A real solution would be a rewrite of the init stuff (I saw that already
somewhere on the Wget 2.0 wish list or somewhere - don't remeber exactly).
I already wrote this kind of code and would contribute it to Wget.
But i am unshure how to apply it to Wget. Since it would be a pretty big
change, should i git-clone Wget and you merge later or do you create a new
branch or ...
Ah, than we again have to discuss that infamous c89/c99 thing.
AFAIR, the main argument against c99 came from Daniel Stenberg (Curl, haxx.se)
who mentioned MS Visual C not being C99 ready (it will never be, said MS).
I just saw that Debian has MinGW cross compiler packets for Win32 and Win64
with gcc 4.6, but I have no experience with those.
Does anybody know if that is a real alternative to MS VC ?