Re: [Nmh-workers] Artificial argv limits.

[Paul Fox]

david wrote:
 > Paul F. wrote:
 > 
 > > david wrote:
 > >  > Paul F. wrote:
 > >  >
 > >  > > as for the rest of mh -- it's certainly possible to hit the MAXARGS
 > >  > > limit with other commands (show, for instance), but i suspect the
 > >  > > frequency is much lower, and those, too, can be fixed as needed.
 > >  >
 > >  > I'd vote for nuking these, as well:
 > >  >
 > >  >   uip/forw.c:         if (mp->numsel >= MAXARGS - i)
 > >  >   uip/mshcmds.c:      if (mp->numsel > MAXARGS - 1) {
 > >  >   uip/show.c:    if (mp->numsel > MAXARGS - 2)
 > >
 > > i'll take a look, and take a stab at them.  they'll need more
 > > careful review.
 > 
 > All of them load a statically sized array, so it would have
 > to be changed to dynamically allocated.  Maybe it's not
 > worth the trouble.  There'd be an inconsistency between
 > msh's rmm and the standalone, but I don't think we need to
 > invest any effort in maintaining msh.

show and forw were (relatively) easy.  msh is much harder, since
it's a maze of twisty argument vectors, all different.  i think
i'll not put much more time into it.

(having just stumbled on app_msgarg(), i'm going to look at redoing my
show and forw changes.)

paul
=---------------------
 paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 32.2 degrees)