Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #1928, comment 7
- Timestamp:
- 02/03/20 20:04:32 (5 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Ticket #1928, comment 7
initial v1 10 10 The way I see it, 101-feature_test_fix.patch and 103-sys_nerr.patch are harmless and IMO they could not possibly be the culprits. The 200 and 300 series patches do not modify the code. They only modify configuration files and therefore they are not suspects. 11 11 12 102-sizeof_test_fix.patch is a possible suspect, but it looks okay to me. It uses a clever hack to determine the size of int. Here is the relevant part of auto/types/sizeof after applying the patch:12 102-sizeof_test_fix.patch is a possible suspect, but it looks okay to me. It uses a clever hack to determine the size of $ngx_type. Here is the relevant part of auto/types/sizeof after applying the patch: 13 13 14 14 {{{ … … 51 51 52 52 53 Note that it is the ('0' + sizeof($ngx_type)) construct in object_code_block[] that is used to determine the size of int. "sed" utility then looks for the sequence of characters defined in object_code_block and obtains value of ('0' + sizeof($ngx_type)). Do you see any issue with this approach?53 Note that it is the ('0' + sizeof($ngx_type)) construct in object_code_block[] that is used to determine the size of $ngx_type. "sed" utility then looks for the sequence of characters defined in object_code_block and obtains value of ('0' + sizeof($ngx_type)). Do you see any issue with this approach?
