From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: new auparse question
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:55:26 -0400
Message-ID: <201108312055.26888.sgrubb@redhat.com>
References: <1314822708.2094.127.camel@lcb>
	<201108311649.46375.sgrubb@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com>
Received: from x2.localnet (vpn-232-186.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.232.186])
	by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP
	id p810tmn2030466
	for <linux-audit@redhat.com>; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:55:48 -0400
In-Reply-To: <201108311649.46375.sgrubb@redhat.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/options/linux-audit>,
	<mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-audit@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit>,
	<mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com
Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com
To: linux-audit@redhat.com
List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com

On Wednesday, August 31, 2011 04:49:46 PM Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 31, 2011 04:31:48 PM LC Bruzenak wrote:
> > So my question is - is this a bug (I would think so) or should I always
> > precede any auparse call sequence with at least one fresh
> > auparse_first_field call?
> 
> A segfault is a bug as far as this library is concerned. I know other
> libraries let you segfault if you do something wrong. I'll try to make a
> reproducer and see what's going on.

Patch applied to svn:
https://fedorahosted.org/audit/changeset/567

-Steve