From 580043075e4b194b1aa118ea63c1993c99a70934 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Phil Sutter <n0-1@freewrt.org>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 01:25:25 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] relying on the return value of scanf when using %n is bad

---
 src/conky.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/conky.c b/src/conky.c
index 50daaf6e..d278e85f 100644
--- a/src/conky.c
+++ b/src/conky.c
@@ -1336,8 +1336,8 @@ static struct text_object *construct_text_object(const char *s,
 	END OBJ(buffers, INFO_BUFFERS)
 	END OBJ(cached, INFO_BUFFERS)
 #define SCAN_CPU(__arg, __var) { \
-	int __offset; \
-	if (__arg && sscanf(__arg, " cpu%u %n", &__var, &__offset) == 2) \
+	int __offset = 0; \
+	if (__arg && sscanf(__arg, " cpu%u %n", &__var, &__offset) > 0) \
 		__arg += __offset; \
 	else \
 		__var = 0; \