Hi
Including full quote as submitter was not Cc-ed.
> Is there some particular reason why the simple
> while loop tests
>
> while (count-- > 0) {
> fprintf(stderr, "=");
> }
>
> and
>
> while (width-- > 0) {
> fprintf(stderr, " ");
> }
>
> would not work properly? The insertions "> 0" are
> new in relation to the public software. This make
> the while loops trivially skipped for negative
> parameters.
width and cound are both unsigned, so it's not so much an issue that
they become negative, but rather way too large.
I guess the bug submitter did not wait till a couple of billion chars
was printed :-)
> Would
>
> width = abs(misc_screen_width());
misc_screen_width is unsigned 16 bits...
> and
>
> count = abs(width * gauge->value / 100);
value is a 64 bit unsigned integer
> improve robustness?
But the line that probably is te culprit is, is the one following it:
width -= count;
unless gauge->value is always between 0 and 100?
Cheers
Luk
PS: It might not be a bad idea to NMU the package to fix this and the
other bugs?
PS2: Should this bug not be tagged lfs?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
