X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=45se2njzCgQvCNToH3nGlDxkfL7x2eG2SvQpsy6FUlU=;
	b=jOxPtg2Z+9pXc799b5snxCGKvVw4tA+OVgbfwOGvMpWw6aksjP7AzMahonD0jY8c/x
	hj1HaygZgQaM3Poqh391nNY41VhqpmQFimlaNt7nB0M6KL2hqgJS8mL7V+ndqIUpo8hb
	PXB7aKW6m90kxwe2ErLQUwH462PvcNaFhpRAZfmqdulCUotTQM3jCCgowlnO94jW1XGF
	W0mMk01BaQRxsp+puKkukiE3WJr5+Rjmo9GwZqZTtMcPoE3DJmTXABSl537sT0LLpIHA
	XZPdF9ndTijLSJfiakOwb0m967HebOOo1hhE/0nBm0NVUNzYZ+vnxIHVQHmT+lam5RGy
	RzMg==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.202.64.3 with SMTP id n3mr24142031oia.53.1442429928466; Wed,
	16 Sep 2015 11:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<201509161849.t8GIne1A010595@envy.delorie.com>
References:	<CAA2C=vCi88BYHh-yRXvtx8az13Y9wymqkjs93UJHx=qaZRPOGQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<cae6b037-4d08-4255-aa4f-d423a86a0d1c AT googlegroups DOT com>
	<83d1xi6ye1 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
	<CAA2C=vC4D8sm=3JMbLGAL-cPq7xAMZg32FCU0hezBrhkK9K9kA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<b27e79c8-8084-44f0-81c6-4487d88840c2 AT googlegroups DOT com>
	<201509161849 DOT t8GIne1A010595 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Sep 2015 21:58:48 +0300
Message-ID:	<CAA2C=vBdCjAQHrtBdS7izxQ-jMCJV=fE2aDz0Bcq_Xf8Vi9pnA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: dlopen.c: make sure filename is not NULL and not empty
From:	"Ozkan Sezer (sezeroz AT gmail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On 9/16/15, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>
>> When this has clarified we will need a new djdev205.zip,
>> etc... before we can proceed.
>
> I wouldn't trigger a 2.05 rebuild just for this.  It just moves error
> handling for a bad usage from one spot to another, it doesn't make
> anything broken suddenly work.  If anyone passed a NULL to popen

s/popen/dlopen/

> before, it failed.

It would segfault, but yes a failure nonetheless

>  If they pass NULL now, it fails.
>

Yes

> If we have *other* reasons to rebuild 2.05, we can include it then.
>

- Raw text -