m...@netbsd.org wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 04:32:03PM +1000, Simon Burge wrote: > > Should you be allowed to call dirname(3) on the results of a previous > > dirname(3) call? > > This is about minidlna, right?
Yes, minidlna. > if it works, please feel free to add > SSP_SUPPORTED= no > to the makefile. > > it's a hack, but it'll give us the ability to continue discussing what > the correct solution is without users being affected by it. The problem is that dirname(3) is what is calling memcpy() with the arguments that set off the SSP check. It's libc code, not minidlna code. Cheers, Simon.
