Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!spdcc!dyer
From: dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aux
Subject: Re: stat(), lstat() again.
Message-ID: <4038@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM>
Date: 14 Sep 90 20:27:13 GMT
References: <3422@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer)
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Lines: 20

In article <3422@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> jim@jagmac2.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Jagielski) writes:
]Well... if I do the following, lstat() doesn't work:
]	struct stat *sbuf;
]	lstat("/unix", sbuf);
]But this DOES:
]	struct stat sbuf;
]	lstat("/unix", &sbuf);
]
]It looks like in case #1, sbuf is pointing somewhere dangerous and when lstat
]is called, memory is destroyed... 

OK, so where's the bug?  You've not understood the C language.
Just where do you think sbuf is pointing to in the first example?
If you don't assign a value to a variable, how can you expect to
use its value as something meaningful?

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
dyer@arktouros.mit.edu, dyer@hstbme.mit.edu