Re: Git string manipulation functions wrong?

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: May 21, 2007, 14:36 UTC
Message-ID: <20070521143616.GG4489@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20070521131103.GN8200@gateway.home>

On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:11:03PM CEST, Erik Mouw wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Hi,
> 
> I got this forwarded from a friend who is subscribed to the Dovecot
> mailing lists (dovecot is a pop3/imap server).
> 
>   http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2007-May/022853.html
>   http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2007-May/022856.html
> 
> The Dovecot author claims there are "basic string manipulation errors"
> in the git code and that's a reason for him not to use git.
> 
> I can see his problem with *snprintf() functions in the case where the
> amount of output is larger than the buffer size: *snprintf() will
> return the number of characters written if there would have been enough
> space to write them, which will lead to problems with code like "len +=
> snprintf(buf, max, bla, ...)". I don't see his problems with strncpy(),
> though.

It's the opposite for me - we don't properly set the NUL byte for smoe of our strncpy() calls, but I don't really see his problem with snprintf(), we seem to handle its return value correctly everywhere (except diff.c, but there the buffer sizes should be designed in such a way that an overflow should be impossible).

-- 
				Petr "Pasky the Sleepy" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Ever try. Ever fail. No matter. // Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
		-- Samuel Beckett