From: | Jason Tishler <Jason(dot)Tishler(at)dothill(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Dr(dot) Volker Zell" <Dr(dot)Volker(dot)Zell(at)oracle(dot)com>, Cygwin <cygwin(at)sources(dot)redhat(dot)com>, pgsql-ports(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Problem Building Cygwin PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2000-09-22 19:50:51 |
Message-ID: | 20000922155051.A2515@DP |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-ports |
Earnie,
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 11:01:25AM -0700, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> Hmm... This appears that it would potentially cause a memory leak. What
> happens if instead of this patch you initialize the pointer to NULL?
I guess that I should have giving more context:
void
usage(void)
{
...
user = getenv("USER");
if (!user)
{
#ifndef WIN32
pw = getpwuid(geteuid());
if (pw)
user = pw->pw_name;
...
#else
user = "?";
#endif
}
...
#if !defined(WIN32) && !defined(__CYGWIN__)
if (pw)
free(pw);
#endif
}
The relevant Cygwin source (i.e., src/winsup/cygwin/passwd.cc) and the
getpwuid() man page (from Solaris):
The functions getpwnam(), getpwuid(), getpwent(), and
fgetpwent() use *static* storage that is re-used in each call,
making these routines unsafe for use in multithreaded appli-
cations.
seemed to indicate that free-ing the return value from getpwuid() was a
bad idea. Can someone confirm or refute this supposition?
Thanks,
Jason
--
Jason Tishler
Director, Software Engineering Phone: +1 (732) 264-8770 x235
Dot Hill Systems Corporation Fax: +1 (732) 264-8798
82 Bethany Road, Suite 7 Email: Jason(dot)Tishler(at)dothill(dot)com
Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA WWW: http://www.dothill.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pete Forman | 2000-09-25 08:27:04 | Re: NT FAQ needs updating |
Previous Message | Jason Tishler | 2000-09-22 17:06:00 | Re: Problem Building Cygwin PostgreSQL |