banned.h: fix vsprintf warning
cover banned.h: fix vsprintf warning
Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is expected.
Andrey Portnoy (1):
banned.h: fix vsprintf warning
banned.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
base-commit: 75b2f01a0f642b39b0f29b6218515df9b5eb798e
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-322%2Fandportnoy%2Ffix-vsprintf-warning-v1
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-322/andportnoy/fix-vsprintf-warning-v1
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/322
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
PATCH 1/1 banned.h: fix vsprintf warning
From: Andrey Portnoy <[email protected]>
Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is expected.
--- banned.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
banned.h +1 -1
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@#define vsprintf (...) BANNED(vsprintf)#else #define sprintf (buf,fmt,arg) BANNED(sprintf) -#define vsprintf (buf,fmt,arg) BANNED(sprintf) +#define vsprintf (buf,fmt,arg) BANNED(vsprintf)#endif #endif /* BANNED_H */
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
Quoted 2 lines · Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget
Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is expected.
Good eyes. Thanks.
Quoted 12 lines
Andrey Portnoy (1):
banned.h: fix vsprintf warningbanned.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)base-commit:
75b2f01a0f642b39b0f29b6218515df9b5eb798e
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-322%2Fandportnoy%2Ffix-vsprintf-warning-v1
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-322/andportnoy/fix-vsprintf-warning-v1
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/322
Quoted 6 lines · Junio C Hamano
Quoted 2 lines · Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget
Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is expected.
Good eyes. Thanks.
There's an identical patch in:
and both were inspired by:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20793298
whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from either submitter.
I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers. "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.
-Peff
Quoted 4 lines · Jeff King
Quoted 2 lines · Junio C Hamano
"Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is expected.
Good eyes. Thanks.
There's an identical patch in:
Thanks for mentioning. I did send mine in around a day ago now, but it came in on a Sunday, so it makes sense that Andrey's message may have appeared earlier in mailboxes when looking today.
I don't really mind about the credit, nor do I think there's much value in crediting you or me with 'Racily-implemented-by'. My patch has a few more details such as blame information (and how the typo was only made in the explicit version, not the variadic form), so it may be worthwhile to take that instead of this, but I don't mind either way.
Quoted 3 lines
and both were inspired by:
Indeed. It was a little surprising to see 'banned.h' at the top of Hacker News when I checked it this weekend :-).
Quoted 9 lines
whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from either submitter.
I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers. "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.
-Peff
Yep.
Thanks,
Taylor
Quoted 13 lines · Jeff King
Quoted 6 lines · Junio C Hamano
Quoted 2 lines · Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget
Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is expected.
Good eyes. Thanks.
Quoted 7 lines
There's an identical patch in:
and both were inspired by:
Nope, mine was not “inspired by” that comment, noticed the bug myself. I did look at this header because it was posted on HN, though.
Quoted 11 lines
whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from either submitter.
I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers. "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.
-Peff
Quoted 13 lines · Jeff King
Quoted 6 lines · Junio C Hamano
Quoted 2 lines · Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget
Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is expected.
Good eyes. Thanks.
Quoted 7 lines
There's an identical patch in:
and both were inspired by:
Nope, mine was not “inspired by” that comment, noticed the bug myself. I did look at this header because it was posted on HN, though.
Quoted 11 lines
whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from either submitter.
I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers. "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.
-Peff
Quoted 4 lines · Taylor Blau
... My patch has a few
more details such as blame information (and how the typo was only made in the explicit version, not the variadic form), so it may be worthwhile to take that instead of this, but I don't mind either way.
Yup, that was exactly why I took that version (after tentatively queuing the other one, but discarded before pushing the integration result out).
Thanks, all.
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers. "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
Please don't X-<.