> On 2 Jul 2024, at 02:33, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 09:19:59PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> The bit I don't understand about this discussion is what will happen >>> with users that currently have exactly 1024 chars in backup names today. >>> With this change, we'll be truncating their names to 1023 chars instead. >>> Why would they feel that such change is welcome? >> >> That's precisely what I was getting at. Maybe it makes sense to change, >> maybe >> not, but that's not for this patch to decide as that's a different discussion >> from using safe string copying API's. > > Yep. Agreed to keep backward-compatibility here, even if I suspect > there is close to nobody relying on backup label names of this size.
I suspect so too, and it might be a good project for someone to go over such buffers to see if there is reason grow or contract. Either way, pushed the strlcpy part. -- Daniel Gustafsson
