----- Original Message ----- > > This is just for sanity. The value PATH_MAX was chosen after > > discussion > > with K. Y. Srinivasan and Olaf Hering instead of some "magic" > > number like > > 256 or 512. > > PATH_MAX is a magic name.
It is defined in "limits.h". I would welcome some more constructive argumentation and critics. > > > Using snprintf() is a good idea, but you need to check the return > > > value and handle the truncation case somehow. > > > > By using PATH_MAX sized buffer there is no need for handling the > > truncation > > case. > > You are claiming two contradictory things: sprintf() may overrun the > buffer, so we need the length check provided by snprintf(), but there > is no need to check for truncation because we know the length is > sufficient. So what do you propose? How should it be solved? Thank you. Regards, Tomas Hozza -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
