On 24/01/2021 18:09, Jonas wrote:
> Dear NetSurf developers,
>
> I would like to point out a possible integer overflow bug on systems
> where size_t is 32-bit. In netsurf/desktop/netsurf.c:170 -- multiplying
> ‘disc_cache_size’ (being 1 GB) with 20 gives 0, thus resulting in
> ‘hysteresis’ also be
On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 11:03:43AM -0800, o...@eigenstate.org wrote:
> Quoth Thorsten Otto :
> > On Sonntag, 24. Januar 2021 19:09:35 CET Jonas wrote:
> > > What do you think?
> >
> > I think that a compiler that defines size_t to be 32bit on a 64bit system
> > is
> > broken ;)
>
> It's perfect
Quoth Thorsten Otto :
> On Sonntag, 24. Januar 2021 19:09:35 CET Jonas wrote:
> > What do you think?
>
> I think that a compiler that defines size_t to be 32bit on a 64bit system is
> broken ;)
>
>
It's perfectly legal -- size_t is required to hold
the maximum allowed object size. It's not req
On Sonntag, 24. Januar 2021 19:09:35 CET Jonas wrote:
> What do you think?
I think that a compiler that defines size_t to be 32bit on a 64bit system is
broken ;)
___
netsurf-dev mailing list -- netsurf-dev@netsurf-browser.org
To unsubscribe send an ema
Dear Netsurf developers,
I would like to point out a possible integer overflow bug on systems where
size_t is 32-bit. In netsurf/desktop/netsurf.c:170 -- multiplying
‘disc_cache_size’ (being 1 GB) with 20 gives 0, thus resulting in ‘hysteresis’
also becoming 0. We discovered this on Plan 9 (whe
