X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	q=dns; s=default; b=r0tJ/liOXd8zr0DujGSMcG6wQTxMm2YeAeGWHNyC1cf
	664iQTZqn0lEwHrDUq+DuMkiPO+TQ5xxhMOdiwPPPpjun6R+OnPykUgiUCjb63xP
	3dRecGwQTU21l+W262apyXQDKbpE2yIvHf19Hffcz2Xdo8R8JbNBLWT1892CoWD4
	=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	s=default; bh=Bs0SS7noA3Bapm3bq8MmKT4Pplg=; b=VA2fuMdZaC9pNyqug
	eU4DGjsWa/GbrSd1/QRR9dips7F3Zdc+Qc4zEwleeBiBNJQQur6i9od4sSEaZ4V2
	fg9QDujcLJJnmR6TmYqpk/q2lOsedYARZU88STUHhtiMpCKdLXIES/SBufXNIxBx
	i3Y+8ufdmxvpeNZKTP5Bz9lZ68=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_COUK,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	out.ipsmtp3nec.opaltelecom.net
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered:	true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result:	ApMBAPmt91JV0kxB/2dsb2JhbAANTMBHgxWBHIMZAQEBBDhAEQsYCRYPCQMCAQIBRRMIAQGvEqElF48EFoQiAQOsO4E+
X-IPAS-Result:	ApMBAPmt91JV0kxB/2dsb2JhbAANTMBHgxWBHIMZAQEBBDhAEQsYCRYPCQMCAQIBRRMIAQGvEqElF48EFoQiAQOsO4E+
Message-ID:	<52F7AEC5.5090205@tiscali.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 09 Feb 2014 16:37:25 +0000
From:	David Stacey <drstacey AT tiscali DOT co DOT uk>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: get rid of getpwent? (Was: cygwin-1.7.28 getpwent header declaration changes ?)
References:	<52F339CA DOT 5070305 AT gmail DOT com> <20140206090117 DOT GD2821 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <52F361C5 DOT 3000807 AT gmail DOT com> <20140206141321 DOT GI2821 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <52F40208 DOT 5030901 AT etr-usa DOT com> <20140207094917 DOT GN2821 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <52F4E540 DOT 2010606 AT tiscali DOT co DOT uk> <52F51D19 DOT 6080807 AT etr-usa DOT com> <31347914-BB4F-4039-984B-731B6C72F903 AT etr-usa DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<31347914-BB4F-4039-984B-731B6C72F903@etr-usa.com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

On 09/02/2014 15:45, Warren Young wrote:
> Results:
>
> /bin/cppcheck.exe

This intrigued me. cppcheck is a static analyser, so what's it doing 
with getpwent()? I had a nosy in the source code, and it appears that 
cppcheck has a rule checking for POSIX calls that are not re-entrant. If 
a call to getpwent() is found in your source code, cppcheck will 
recommend that you replace this with getpwent_r().

As far as I can tell, cppcheck doesn't actually call getpwent() at all; 
this is a false positive turned up by strings(1).

Dave.



--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -