[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: pending patches?
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: pending patches? |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:22:47 +0100 |
Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Eric Blake on 11/13/2009 11:35 AM:
>> I also discovered that
>> FreeBSD getgroups(-1,NULL) fails with EFAULT instead of EINVAL, which
>> means that it mistakenly populates a valid pointer rather than rejecting a
>> negative argument; should be easy to fix today.
>
> Like so. And I feel silly for the buffer overrun in the test; I was
> originally using xnmalloc, but didn't want drag in "xalloc.h" for the
> test, but converted it wrong.
...
> Subject: [PATCH] getgroups: work around FreeBSD bug
>
> FreeBSD 7.2 mistakenly succeeds on getgroups(-1,ptr) (POSIX
> requires EINVAL failure since -1 is less than the proper result).
>
> * lib/getgroups.c (rpl_getgroups): Work around the bug.
> * m4/getgroups.m4 (gl_FUNC_GETGROUPS): Detect the bug.
> * doc/posix-functions/getgroups.texi (getgroups): Document it.
> * tests/test-getgroups.c (main): Fix buffer overrun.
The patch looks fine.
For some reason (probably due to the dichotomy of success/failure
in shell vs. true/false in C) I alway have to stare hard at code
like this to be sure the returned expression is not reversed:
+ [AC_RUN_IFELSE([AC_LANG_PROGRAM([AC_INCLUDES_DEFAULT],
+ [[int size = getgroups (0, 0);
+ gid_t *list = malloc (size * sizeof *list);
+ return getgroups (-1, list) != -1;]])],
+ [gl_cv_func_getgroups_works=yes],
+ [gl_cv_func_getgroups_works=no],
+ [gl_cv_func_getgroups_works="guessing no"])])
- Re: pending patches?, Eric Blake, 2009/11/13
- Re: pending patches?,
Jim Meyering <=
- Re: pending patches?, Eric Blake, 2009/11/13
- Re: pending patches?, Pádraig Brady, 2009/11/13
- Re: pending patches?, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/14
- Re: pending patches?, Eric Blake, 2009/11/14
- usleep (was: pending patches?), Eric Blake, 2009/11/18
- Re: usleep (was: pending patches?), Eric Blake, 2009/11/18
- Re: usleep, Ludovic Courtès, 2009/11/18
- Re: usleep, Eric Blake, 2009/11/18
- Re: usleep, Eric Blake, 2009/11/19
- Re: usleep, Eric Blake, 2009/11/20