You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@openoffice.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2012/08/21 05:11:49 UTC
[Bug 120628] New: Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
Priority: P3
Bug ID: 120628
Assignee: ooo-issues@incubator.apache.org
Summary: Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
Severity: normal
Issue Type: DEFECT
Classification: Application
OS: Windows XP
Reporter: companycy@gmail.com
Hardware: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Version: AOO350-dev
Component: code
Product: word processor
When setPropertyValue, we should ensure the Property Name should not be empty
before it's set.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 120628] Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
--- Comment #2 from bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> ---
There is still some work left to re-factor some functions in this source file.
Will take time to do it if possible.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 120628] Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
Du Jing <bj...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
CC| |bjdujing@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from Du Jing <bj...@gmail.com> ---
close invalid defect
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 120628] Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #5 from bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> ---
Mark as invalid. It's better to initialize the property name as some not null
string. However, it's hard to test this kind of defense code.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 120628] Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
--- Comment #4 from bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> ---
When we add new Id into enum PropertyIds from PropertyIds.hxx, it's possible to
miss addition related string in below function.
const rtl::OUString& PropertyNameSupplier::GetName( PropertyIds eId ) const;
If the string is lost, then the empty PropertyName may occur, and it's unknown
behavior to setPropertyValue. Then as defense code, it's necessary to add such
check.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 120628] Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #79016| |review?
Flags| |
--- Comment #1 from bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> ---
Created attachment 79016
--> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=79016&action=edit
patch for setPropertyValue
There are 3 changes which mainly include setPropertyValue for:
1. table
2. row
3. cell
Check the potential null Property Name before we serPropertyValue for it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 120628] Catch NULL property name when setPropertyValue
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #79016|0 |1
is obsolete| |
Attachment #79016|review? |
Flags| |
Attachment #79032| |review?
Flags| |
--- Comment #3 from bjcheny <co...@gmail.com> ---
Created attachment 79032
--> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=79032&action=edit
patch for setPropertyValue
Change patch path from sw to main when creating.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.