Zero initialize local variables. (backport #1737)

[mergify]

This is an automatic backport of pull request #1737 done by Mergify.
Cherry-pick of a14c6bc has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/main/pr-1737
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/main'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit a14c6bcd.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Changes to be committed:
	modified:   include/exiv2/value.hpp
	modified:   samples/Jzon.cpp
	modified:   samples/geotag.cpp
	modified:   samples/largeiptc-test.cpp
	modified:   samples/write-test.cpp
	modified:   src/actions.cpp
	modified:   src/bmffimage.cpp
	modified:   src/canonmn_int.cpp
	modified:   src/convert.cpp
	modified:   src/datasets.cpp
	modified:   src/preview.cpp
	modified:   src/tags_int.cpp
	modified:   src/types.cpp
	modified:   src/value.cpp
	modified:   src/webpimage.cpp
	modified:   src/xmp.cpp

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   include/exiv2/types.hpp
	both modified:   samples/stringto-test.cpp
	both modified:   src/http.cpp
	both modified:   src/image.cpp
	both modified:   src/pgfimage.cpp

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

---

Mergify commands and options

More conditions and actions can be found in the documentation.

You can also trigger Mergify actions by commenting on this pull request:

• @Mergifyio refresh will re-evaluate the rules
• @Mergifyio rebase will rebase this PR on its base branch
• @Mergifyio update will merge the base branch into this PR
• @Mergifyio backport <destination> will backport this PR on <destination> branch

Additionally, on Mergify dashboard you can:

• look at your merge queues
• generate the Mergify configuration with the config editor.

Finally, you can contact us on https://mergify.io/

[hassec]

@kevinbackhouse, maybe it's easier to just run the same script on main instead of trying to fix these conflicts?
WDTY?

[kevinbackhouse]

@hassec: yes, that's probably easier. I'll close this one.