I'm preparing to PR a succession of privs changes with the ultimate goal
of severely limiting the scope of the binary oper/user dichotomy and
move conceptually distinct oper functions into their own privs.
Accomplishing this is a non-trivial task, and can wait, but it's
inconvenient now to have such functions enabled by the same mechanism
that grants any privs at all--so I'm moving all of them to a
transitional priv with the intention of eroding that later.
[ircd/match.c:316]: (error) Shifting a negative value is undefined behaviour
[librb/src/patricia.c:55]: (error) Shifting a negative value is undefined behaviour
[modules/m_alias.c:64]: (portability) '(void*)message' is of type 'void *'. When using void pointers in calculations, the behaviour is undefined.
[modules/m_time.c:111]: (warning) %u in format string (no. 9) requires 'unsigned int' but the argument type is 'signed int'.
[modules/m_time.c:111]: (warning) %u in format string (no. 10) requires 'unsigned int' but the argument type is 'signed int'.
[librb/src/dictionary.c:819]: (warning) %d in format string (no. 3) requires 'int' but the argument type is 'unsigned int'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:1080]: (warning) %d in format string (no. 3) requires 'int' but the argument type is 'unsigned int'.
[ircd/s_user.c:351] -> [ircd/s_user.c:357]: (warning) Either the condition '0!=source_p' is redundant or there is possible null pointer dereference: source_p.
[extensions/ip_cloaking_3.0.c:109]: (warning, inconclusive) The buffer 'buf' may not be null-terminated after the call to strncpy().
[ircd/chmode.c:256]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[modules/m_help.c:100]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[modules/m_knock.c:169]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[modules/m_stats.c:628]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[modules/m_stats.c:727]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:601]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:704]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:739]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:763]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:768]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:774]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:781]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:786]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:791]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[librb/src/radixtree.c:804]: (style) Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'.
[ircd/wsproc.c:372]: (style) Unused variable: len
[modules/core/m_modules.c:382]: (style) Unused variable: i
[modules/m_stats.c:741]: (style) Unused variable: amsg
[ircd/authproc.c:390]: (style) Unused variable: iter
[ircd/authproc.c:391]: (style) Unused variable: client_p
Also fix up some return values and stuff to use bool (or void if
nothing). I just did it whilst I was here.
According to jilles, the return value used to signify whether or not the
client had exited. This was error-prone and was fixed a long, long time
ago, but the return value was left int for historical reasons.
Since the return type is not used (and has no clear use case anyway),
it's safe to just get rid of it.
nenolod gave the thumbs-up to port ircd-seven banfowards to charybdis to spb
for a while, and people have asked about it. Might as well do it since it's a
slow weekend.
Note that as a side effect use_forward is removed from the config and
unconditionally enabled!
