CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2023-11-10 Thread Christos Zoulas
Module Name:src Committed By: christos Date: Fri Nov 10 23:03:25 UTC 2023 Modified Files: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: Makefile t_ssp.sh Added Files: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: h_getcwd2.c Log Message: PR/57689: RVP: getcwd() not overridable with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE To gen

CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2023-11-10 Thread Christos Zoulas
Module Name:src Committed By: christos Date: Fri Nov 10 23:03:25 UTC 2023 Modified Files: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: Makefile t_ssp.sh Added Files: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: h_getcwd2.c Log Message: PR/57689: RVP: getcwd() not overridable with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE To gen

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2014-01-10 Thread Martin Husemann
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 08:47:01PM +0200, Jukka Ruohonen wrote: > I got a bit lost with Jelinek's reply above. Aren't those tests specifically > for NetBSD's ssp(3), a.k.a. -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 and not -fstack-protector? Yes, the ticket could be improved, but actually the behaviour is identical. As

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2014-01-10 Thread Jukka Ruohonen
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:45:34AM +, Martin Husemann wrote: > Module Name: src > Committed By: martin > Date: Fri Jan 10 10:45:34 UTC 2014 > > Modified Files: > src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: t_ssp.sh > > Log Message: > In the strcat test, smash the stack more severely (this all may

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2011-07-24 Thread Martin Husemann
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 11:47:30AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote: > Declare sum volatile instead? Yes, that should work too (I don't realy care either way). Martin

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2011-07-24 Thread Christos Zoulas
In article <20110723221743.b79a617...@cvs.netbsd.org>, Martin Husemann wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Module Name: src >Committed By: martin >Date: Sat Jul 23 22:17:43 UTC 2011 > >Modified Files: > src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: h_raw.c > >Log Message: >gcc optimizes away the side effect free c

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2010-12-29 Thread Paul Goyette
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Alan Barrett wrote: On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: I don't know where "len" comes from, but bad things will happen if len > sizeof(b). ...which is exactly the intention here, isn't it? You are probably right. I think that there should be comments explai

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2010-12-29 Thread Alan Barrett
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > I don't know where "len" comes from, but bad things will happen if > > len > sizeof(b). > > ...which is exactly the intention here, isn't it? You are probably right. I think that there should be comments explaining that the purpose of the code i

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2010-12-29 Thread Paul Goyette
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Alan Barrett wrote: On Tue, 28 Dec 2010, Christos Zoulas wrote: Modified Files: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: h_vsnprintf.c h_vsprintf.c -static void -wrap(char *str, size_t len, const char *fmt, ...) +void +wrap(size_t len, const char *fmt, ...) { + char b[10];

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2010-12-29 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:57:27AM +0200, Alan Barrett wrote: > On Tue, 28 Dec 2010, Christos Zoulas wrote: > > Modified Files: > > src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: h_vsnprintf.c h_vsprintf.c > > > -static void > > -wrap(char *str, size_t len, const char *fmt, ...) > > +void > > +wrap(size_t len, const

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/lib/libc/ssp

2010-12-29 Thread Alan Barrett
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010, Christos Zoulas wrote: > Modified Files: > src/tests/lib/libc/ssp: h_vsnprintf.c h_vsprintf.c > -static void > -wrap(char *str, size_t len, const char *fmt, ...) > +void > +wrap(size_t len, const char *fmt, ...) > { > + char b[10]; > va_list ap; > va_sta