From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4889 invoked by alias); 31 May 2011 05:37:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 4713 invoked by uid 22791); 31 May 2011 05:37:32 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,TW_XS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 May 2011 05:37:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE9F12BAB81; Tue, 31 May 2011 01:37:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id HgPf8SrI+D2j; Tue, 31 May 2011 01:37:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B0822BAB47; Tue, 31 May 2011 01:37:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 759CF145615; Mon, 30 May 2011 22:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 05:37:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: GDB Administrator Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: New ARI warning Tue May 31 01:55:32 UTC 2011 Message-ID: <20110531053707.GG2620@adacore.com> References: <20110531015532.GA10047@sourceware.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110531015532.GA10047@sourceware.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00696.txt.bz2 > > gdb/valops.c:3494: code: sprintf: Do not use sprintf, instead use xsnprintf or xstrprintf > gdb/valops.c:3494: sprintf (concatenated_name, ', namespace_name, name); That'd be a change I made in the gdb_ari.sh script that changes a bit the description of the 'sprintf' rule. Since this is generating a large diff, I used the following grep sequence to verify that we do not have any new entry that isn't a 'sprintf' entry: % grep '^>' diff | grep -v '^>.* sprintf:' (where diff is the contents of both ARI emails). There was no output returned, so we can conclude that no real regression occured today. -- Joel