search for: sumrbuf

...sumresidue=0; SIVAL(s,0,checksum_seed); sum_update(s,4); } -void sum_update(char *p,int len) +void sum_update(void *p1,int len) { +unsigned char * p; + p = (unsigned char *)p1; int i; if (len + sumresidue < CSUM_CHUNK) { memcpy(sumrbuf+sumresidue, p, len); @@ -170,7 +173,7 @@ } } -void sum_end(char *sum) +void sum_end(void *sum) { if (sumresidue) { mdfour_update(&md, (uchar *)sumrbuf, sumresidue);

Maybe security related mails should be sent elsewhere? I didn't notice any so here it goes: sender.c:receive_sums() s->count = read_int(f); .. s->sums = (struct sum_buf *)malloc(sizeof(s->sums[0])*s->count); if (!s->sums) out_of_memory("receive_sums"); for (i=0; i < (int) s->count;i++) { s->sums[i].sum1 = read_int(f);

...ksum.c,v retrieving revision 1.25 diff -u -r1.25 checksum.c --- checksum.c 10 Apr 2003 01:50:12 -0000 1.25 +++ checksum.c 7 May 2003 14:27:06 -0000 @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ void sum_end(char *sum) { - if (sumresidue) { + if (sumresidue || remote_version >= 27) { mdfour_update(&md, (uchar *)sumrbuf, sumresidue); }

I'm in the midst of coding a patch set for consideration that will bump the protocol version and have a couple of observations. The current minimum backwards-compatible protocol is 15 but we have code that checks for protocol versions as old as 12. If someone else doesn't beat me to it i'm considering cleaning out the pre-15 compatibility code. A backwards compatibility patch could

...+ rprintf(FINFO, "#ET# csum_length=%d\n", csum_length); } @@ -171,9 +176,9 @@ } void sum_end(char *sum) { - if (sumresidue) { + if (sumresidue) { /* remove the test to address http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/rsync/2002-August/008011.html */ mdfour_update(&md, (uchar *)sumrbuf, sumresidue); } mdfour_result(&md, (uchar *)sum); Only in rsync-patched: config.h diff -r -u4 rsync-2.5.5/fileio.c rsync-patched/fileio.c --- rsync-2.5.5/fileio.c Sat Jan 26 02:07:34 2002 +++ rsync-patched/fileio.c Mon Aug 5 10:05:15 2002 @@ -111,32 +111,43 @@ map->p_size = 0; map...