* Tomas Vondra (t...@fuzzy.cz) wrote: > On 15 Listopad 2013, 1:00, David Rowley wrote: > > more focused on trying to draw a bit of attention to commit > > 061b88c732952c59741374806e1e41c1ec845d50 which uses strncpy and does not > > properly set the last byte to 0 afterwards. I think this case could just > > be > > replaced with strlcpy which does all this hard work for us. > > Hmm, you mean this piece of code? > > strncpy(saved_argv0, argv[0], MAXPGPATH); > > IMHO you're right that's probably broken, unless there's some checking > happening before the call.
Agreed, that looks like a place we should be using strlcpy() instead.
Robert, what do you think?
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
