Re: [rfc] PR 20569, segv in follow_exec

Pedro Alves
2016-10-19T13:37:50Z

On 10/18/2016 07:11 PM, Luis Machado wrote:

> I went through the patch and, although this code as a whole is a bit on
> the convoluted side, it looks reasonable to me.
>
> Segfaults are not supposed to happen, so allowing the session to
> continue is a good thing IMO.
>
> Sounds like a good candidate for master and even stable branches.

I didn't look at the patch in detail yet, but I think it'd be
very good to have tests?

Thanks,
Pedro Alves