BIND 10 #1784: b10-resolver incorrectly uses SyncUDPServer

BIND 10 Development do-not-reply at isc.org
Mon Mar 19 14:25:21 UTC 2012


#1784: b10-resolver incorrectly uses SyncUDPServer
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  jinmei
  jinmei                             |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:         |             Milestone:
  defect                             |  Sprint-20120320
                   Priority:  very   |            Resolution:
  high                               |             Sensitive:  0
                  Component:         |           Sub-Project:  DNS
  resolver                           |  Estimated Difficulty:  0
                   Keywords:         |           Total Hours:  0
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by jelte):

 * owner:  jelte => jinmei


Comment:

 my compiler is apparently not as smart as yours, and it needs the non-
 const static vars in dns_service_unittest to be defined outside of the
 class declaration.

 cppcheck noted that data[] wasn't initialized, and, although it doesn't
 really matter what's in it, to make cppcheck happy, i just filled it with
 1's. And another thing it caught is that in getSocketFD, res was
 dereferenced before its NULL check, so i've moved the code there around a
 bit.

 Oh, and I got a linker error when linking against lib/libresolver, needed
 an LIBADD for that.

 I have taken the liberty to address these issues myself, please check in
 commit

 So the addServer calls are the thing you were wondering we should keep?
 I'd say remove them. (they even use the old dlog() calls, but have other
 problems as well)

 Should we warn/error on unknown options in addServerUDPFromFD? (currently
 they are ignored)

 No further comments, for the rest, the changes look OK

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/1784#comment:5>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development


More information about the bind10-tickets mailing list