[Maria-developers] [Commits] Rev 2866: mysqltest: use setenv, not putenv, to make gcov happy. in http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~maria-captains/maria/5.1/
Hi!
"serg" == serg <serg@askmonty.org> writes:
serg> At http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~maria-captains/maria/5.1/ serg> ------------------------------------------------------------ serg> revno: 2866 serg> revision-id: sergii@pisem.net-20100614091854-5ynq6lo943qlaacw serg> parent: monty@askmonty.org-20100613221332-ldsnptg0j0mn8u9a serg> committer: Sergei Golubchik <sergii@pisem.net> serg> branch nick: 5.1 serg> timestamp: Mon 2010-06-14 11:18:54 +0200 serg> message: serg> mysqltest: use setenv, not putenv, to make gcov happy. serg> (backport from MySQL) +static int setenv(const char *name, const char *value, int overwrite) +{ + size_t buflen= strlen(name) + strlen(value) + 2; + char *envvar= (char *)malloc(buflen); + if(!envvar) + return ENOMEM; + strcpy(envvar, name); + strcat(envvar, "="); + strcat(envvar, value); + putenv(envvar); + return 0; +} +#endif I expected better from you :) A much better version is: strcat(strcat(strmov(envvar, name), "="), value); The other question I have is will this not cause a memory leek? If we allocate the same string many times in here it will definitely be a memory leak as putenv() will never free the old value. Regards, Monty
Hi, Michael! On Jun 16, Michael Widenius wrote:
Hi!
"serg" == serg <serg@askmonty.org> writes:
serg> At http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~maria-captains/maria/5.1/ serg> ------------------------------------------------------------ serg> revno: 2866 serg> revision-id: sergii@pisem.net-20100614091854-5ynq6lo943qlaacw serg> parent: monty@askmonty.org-20100613221332-ldsnptg0j0mn8u9a serg> committer: Sergei Golubchik <sergii@pisem.net> serg> branch nick: 5.1 serg> timestamp: Mon 2010-06-14 11:18:54 +0200 serg> message: serg> mysqltest: use setenv, not putenv, to make gcov happy. serg> (backport from MySQL)
+static int setenv(const char *name, const char *value, int overwrite) +{ + size_t buflen= strlen(name) + strlen(value) + 2; + char *envvar= (char *)malloc(buflen); + if(!envvar) + return ENOMEM; + strcpy(envvar, name); + strcat(envvar, "="); + strcat(envvar, value); + putenv(envvar); + return 0; +} +#endif
I expected better from you :)
It's not from me, it's copied from MySQL. My code had only #ifndef HAVE_SETENV #error implement our portable setenv replacement in mysys #endif which passed with flying colors on all PB2 hosts as far as I remember. Still, somebody added an "our portable setenv replacement" later, so apparently some strange systems didn't have a setenv().
A much better version is:
strcat(strcat(strmov(envvar, name), "="), value);
The other question I have is will this not cause a memory leek? If we allocate the same string many times in here it will definitely be a memory leak as putenv() will never free the old value.
Yes, it will. But who cares if on some strange system a mysqltest binary will not free a hundred of bytes explicitly and let them be freed whan an executable exits ? Most probably. valgrind isn't even to them. What *is* important is not to free environment variable values explicitly on systems where gcov exists - which was the reason for me to change putenv() to setenv() in the first place. Regards, Sergei
participants (2)
-
Michael Widenius -
Sergei Golubchik