Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: Patch for Setup.exe problem and for mklink2.cc
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 01:11:03 +1100
Message-ID: <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA76008ABCB@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: "Ton van Overbeek" <tvoverbe AT cistron DOT nl>, <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>,
   <cygwin-patches AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc: <jonas_eriksson AT home DOT se>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g2RECfU00505



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ton van Overbeek [mailto:tvoverbe AT cistron DOT nl] 
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 1:03 AM
> To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com; cygwin-patches AT cygwin DOT com
> Cc: jonas_eriksson AT home DOT se
> Subject: Patch for Setup.exe problem and for mklink2.cc
> 
> 
> Found the problem causing the segment violation and probably 
> causing Jonas Eriksson's problem. It is a typical case of 
> 'off by 1'. In PickView::set_headers the loop filling the 
> window header does one iteration too much, resulting in a 
> call to DoInsertItem with a NULL string pointer and hence a 
> crash following. While debugging this I could not compile the 
> new mklink2.cc ( the
> c++ version of the original mklink2.c). It seems three & (address of 
> c++ operator)
> have disappeared in the transition. Putting them back made 
> the compiler happy. Is this OK Robert ?

I'll check the off-by-one fix in tomorrow, as I'm off to bed now. 

As for the &'s, I wonder if it's a w32api reference issue? The compiler
complains if they are present for me.

I have the latest-and-greatest w32api headers on my system - what do you
have?

Thanks for finding the off-by-one... blush.

Rob