On Tue, 27 Apr 2021, 6:13 am Samuel Thibault, <sthiba...@debian.org> wrote:
> It's not because something is economical that one should want to do it. > > You don't even seem to realize that defining PATH_MAX *does* pose > problem, notably with the actual semantic of realpath(), due to the > semantic that posix attaches to it. > > > > Samue > Economical would be to avoid the rich bug farm that is arbitrary but unenforced limits. PATH_MAX is an open invitation for buffer overflows on any modern system. >
