Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tor api owning control #260

Merged

Conversation

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants
@nmathewson
Copy link
Contributor

@nmathewson nmathewson commented Aug 1, 2018

No description provided.

nmathewson added 9 commits Aug 1, 2018
I'm doing this because I want to make it a lower-level function
again, so that we can use it without linking in the rest of the
universe.
Also refactor some annoying code in tor_ersatz_socketpair.
This change also makes tor_ersatz_socketpair() follow the same
interface as socketpair() rather than tor_socketpair(), so it now
needs to be wrapped in the same code as socketpair() does.
We need this so that the tor_api user can specify some arguments,
while the tor_api implementation adds others.

This implementation detail should not be visible to tor_api users.
This lets us potentially use it for internal passing of windows
sockets.
@coveralls
Copy link

@coveralls coveralls commented Aug 1, 2018

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.03%) to 59.5% when pulling 820aba7 on nmathewson:tor_api_owning_control into 7e4ac02 on torproject:master.

void
tor_main_configuration_free(tor_main_configuration_t *cfg)
{
if (cfg == NULL)
return;
if (cfg->argv_owned) {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < cfg->argc_owned; ++i) {
Copy link
Member

@ahf ahf Aug 30, 2018

Lift int i into the loop?

@torproject-pusher torproject-pusher merged commit 820aba7 into torproject:master Sep 4, 2018
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment