Subject: [htdig3-dev] Re: modification_time_is_now again
From: Geoff Hutchison (ghutchis@wso.williams.edu)
Date: Fri Dec 03 1999 - 13:41:35 PST
I took this to htdig3-dev since that seemed more appropriate.
>I know! That's what I was seeing myself. It was often -1, but sometimes
>it was 255. This makes me wonder if it's not some odd bug in Serialize
>or Deserialize. The wierd thing is when I look at the code, it always
This is entirely possible--there's evidence that there's a memory
leak hiding in there somewhere. Neither Hans-Peter or I were able to
find it amongst the macros.
As to the -1 v. 255 issue, it may be a problem with picking the size
of the variable to store. Hans-Peter's code tries things like char,
short, then int and so on. Since -1 =~ 255 in binary form, this may
be the culprit. (If so, it's surely an unsigned v. signed issue.)
>I realize that there are many other hopcount related changes in 3.2,
>and no, I don't intend to backport them all, but the reason I'm caught
>up on this particular problem is that it seems to me to be a symptom of
>a deeper underlying problem. If I can rule out that it is, I'm OK with
You mentioned that you'd try switching to use 0 as the default and
see if that killed the bug. Did that work? If not, then the bug
certainly indicates *something* is wrong beyond the issue with -1 v.
255 IMHO.
-Geoff
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
htdig3-dev-unsubscribe@htdig.org
You will receive a message to confirm this.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Dec 03 1999 - 13:55:06 PST