Thomas Preud'homme dixit: >> >failed on the use of environ because the bound checking code cannot know >> >the size of the valid area for environ and thus thinks an unsafe access is >> >being
>> Hm. Well, “environ” is just a pointer to some (structured but not >> easily bound) memory are. There *could* be code to scan for the >> end, but that’d not perform. >That's what I added in tcc for argv and the arge (third parameter of main). Ah okay. The problem is that “environ” is more portable than what I got to know as “envp” and you called “arge”, so the shell uses that instead. >in the general case, tcc cannot know when considering an externally defined >symbol if it's an array ended with a NULL value. We need a more generic A possible hack: if the program references a global symbol environ, insert pseudo-code at the beginning of main that does “environ = arge;”. >> Thanks, much welcome! Are you also upstream? > >Yep. When I took over the maintainance of tcc I soon discovered that all of >the bugs that were reported were upstream bug and that nobody would work on >them if I didn't. So I started tackling just the bugs reported within Debian >and eventually I became upstream. :) OK. Sounds like… business as usual. I know that ☻ Thanks, //mirabilos -- <igli> exceptions: a truly awful implementation of quite a nice idea. <igli> just about the worst way you could do something like that, afaic. <igli> it's like anti-design. <mirabilos> that too… may I quote you on that? <igli> sure, tho i doubt anyone will listen ;) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
