From c64c6a35c0afa920633ef1566b4982a8b0fe7fef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kevin Day Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2024 17:08:45 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Bugfix: FSS Extended Write is improperly associated Content with its respective Object. The following is an example of the bad behavior: # fss_extended_write -oc A B -oc C D -oc E F A B D C F E The expected behavior instead should be: # fss_extended_write -oc A B -oc C D -oc E F A B C D E F The problem is that when "-oc" is used for the next set that object and content parameter have the same parameter index position. The operator for testing for this should therefore be ">=" rather than ">". --- level_3/fss_extended_write/c/fss_extended_write.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/level_3/fss_extended_write/c/fss_extended_write.c b/level_3/fss_extended_write/c/fss_extended_write.c index debbec7..f3fdd82 100644 --- a/level_3/fss_extended_write/c/fss_extended_write.c +++ b/level_3/fss_extended_write/c/fss_extended_write.c @@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ extern "C" { content_current = main->parameters.array[fss_extended_write_parameter_content_e].locations.array[j]; if (i + 1 < main->parameters.array[fss_extended_write_parameter_object_e].values.used) { - if (content_current < object_current || content_current > object_next) break; + if (content_current < object_current || content_current >= object_next) break; } status = f_string_dynamics_increase_by(F_fss_default_allocation_step_d, &contents); -- 1.8.3.1