On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 05:02:34PM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> 1. FILENAME_MAX could be less than PATH_MAX, and actually is on >> the BSDs (256 vs 1024). PATH_MAX allows for duplicate slashes and all >> sorts of whacky path crud and probably should be used more liberally >> in the pkg_install code. This however isn't always true in the NetBSD >> case because they're aiming for portability of pkg_install, however >> PATH_MAX is always guaranteed to be at least as large as FILENAME_MAX. > > Well, I've been slowly working on eliminating the use of PATH_MAX in the > NetBSD/pkgsrc version of pkg_install. The performance gain from using > fixed stack space is minimal and the error handling generally > incompletely at best. > > Joerg
Hi Joerg! I'm sorry but I'm a little bit confused by this statement: do you mean that you're replacing PATH_MAX sized buffers to FILENAME_MAX sized buffers? If so this may cause an issue because several of the variables used in constructing the file paths in pkg_install aren't necessarily correct in overflow cases. We need to avoid introducing potential functional flaws with filename truncation like this. I appreciate the work that you've done on the new version of pkg_install -- hopefully we can cross-pollinate some useful pieces with pkg_install in the near future. Thanks, -Garrett _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
