Subject: Re: /etc/login.conf required to exist after user(8) changes
To: Jukka Salmi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: John Nemeth <email@example.com>
Date: 07/29/2005 04:44:14
On Dec 19, 7:50am, Jukka Salmi wrote:
} John Nemeth --> current-users (2005-07-29 04:03:47 -0700):
} > I think more to the point, it is irrelevant that the pointer has
} > been freed. It will still contain the same value. The freeing
} > function can not modify the pointer itself; therefore, the second half
} > of the patch is completely unnecessary. Trying to use the data pointed
} > to by the pointer would be wrong; however, the original code doesn't do
} > this, it merely compares the pointer to NULL.
} Sure, that's why I wrote "possible problem" (I possibly should have
} written "potential problem" instead). Just in case login_close(3) is
} somewhen changed to set `lc = NULL;' after `free(lc);'. I don't know
} how like this is, though...
In order for login_close() to set 'lc = NULL' you would have to
pass a pointer to lc and not lc itself. This would constitute an API
change and thus isn't very likely.
}-- End of excerpt from Jukka Salmi