Hello,
genmodes.c uses the %n capabilities of printf to compute the width of
pieces it outputs. This causes troubles on Windows Vista, because ...
<< Because of security reasons, support for the %n format specifier is
disabled by default in printf and all its variants. ... the default
Hi,
I am building a cross-compiler for arm, which builds "okay", but the
output is very noisy whilst compiling gcc. I'd like to sort some of it
out and submit some patches, but I've not done any patches for gcc
before so I don't want to create a lot of noise on the gcc-patches list
by posting
On 06/06/07, Brian Sidebotham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I am building a cross-compiler for arm, which builds "okay", but the
output is very noisy whilst compiling gcc. I'd like to sort some of it
out and submit some patches, but I've not done any patches for gcc
before so I don't want to cr
On Wed, 2007-06-06 10:15:41 -0700, Brian Sidebotham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- ./gcc/value-prof.cMon Jun 4 17:27:14 2007
> +++ ./gcc/value-prof.cWed Jun 6 10:13:20 2007
>
> @@ -883,15 +883,19 @@ tree_mod_subtract (tree stmt, tree opera
>e12 = split_block (bb, bb1end);
>
Hi,
Sorry, wasted your time already!! Thanks to Manuel for the information too.
I will re-patch, compile and run the testsuite. Sorry to waste your time
with my first mail!
Best Regards,
Brian Sidebotham.
Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-06 10:15:41 -0700, Brian Sidebotham <[EMAIL
On 04 June 2007 23:43, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> "Timothy C Prince" writes:
[ quoting an earlier post of mine ]
>> So, am I correct to believe that we need to use plain 'inline' for c99
>> after gcc 4.4, and 'extern inline' before that? That is, I think I need
>> to write a test that looks
In this case, you don't have to look far to see that you can't use the
return value of printf.
According to my manpage, printf returns 0 on success, 1 on failure. No
mention of the number of characters written. This is different with
sprintf/snprintf (see e.g
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/0
On 04 June 2007 17:02, Christian Joensson wrote:
> configured by ../gcc/configure, generated by GNU Autoconf 2.59,
> with options \" '--disable-nls' '--without-included-gettext'
> '--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs' '--without-x'
> '--disable-libgcj' '--with-system-zlib' '--enable-threads=
On 05 June 2007 01:57, Tim Prince wrote:
> christian.joensson wrote:
>> phew, a few of the cygwin failures show up like this:
>>
>> Executing on host: /usr/local/src/trunk/objdir/gcc/xgcc
>> -B/usr/local/src/trunk/objdir/gcc/ -O3 -g -w -fno-show-column -c
>> -o 20001226-1.o
>> /usr/local/src/t
On 06 June 2007 12:04, Simon Brenner wrote:
> According to my manpage, printf returns 0 on success, 1 on failure. No
> mention of the number of characters written.
Well, maybe you should ...
> use a Real Operating System
! What man page exactly are you referring to?
cheers,
In this case, it's the Mac OS X man page. Which I now see doesn't say
the same thing as POSIX. Which was just the point I was trying to make
- you can't rely on the return value for determining the number of
characters written.
Oh, and I am sure the reality of my Operating System is very close to
Please don't top-post.
Simon Brenner writes:
> On 6/6/07, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 06 June 2007 12:04, Simon Brenner wrote:
> >
> > > According to my manpage, printf returns 0 on success, 1 on failure. No
> > > mention of the number of characters written.
> >
> > Well,
Andrew Haley wrote:
> > In this case, it's the Mac OS X man page. Which I now see doesn't
> > say the same thing as POSIX. Which was just the point I was
> > trying to make you can't rely on the return value for determining
> > the number of characters written.
> Yes we can. gcc is written in ISO
Hello all,
How I can import security in gcj java as we used keytool in jdk.
Plz give me appropriate guidence.
--
Thanks and Regards
Sharad Singh
Sr. Project Associate
EE, IIT Kanpur
Mob:+91- 9450 328 117
Accessing Brihaspati:
http://202.141.40.217:8080/brihaspati/servlet/brihaspati
Login:
> Documentation error? They've got the same man page for printf(1)
> and printf(3):
Oh, except trying it on a real Mac they don't - that website's broken.
Simon, you need to type:
man 3 printf
to read about printf() the C function.
Rup.
__
> According to my manpage, printf returns 0 on success, 1 on failure. No
> mention of the number of characters written. This is different with
> sprintf/snprintf (see e.g
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/95399/functions/snprintf.html),
> but IIRC a number of platforms don't implement those
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 04 June 2007 23:43, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
"Timothy C Prince" writes:
[ quoting an earlier post of mine ]
So, am I correct to believe that we need to use plain 'inline' for c99
after gcc 4.4, and 'extern inline' before that? That is, I think I need
to writ
On 6/5/07 12:28 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> Can someone explain why libjava *must* commit binary files to the
> repository? A merge of trunk to the fortran-experiments branch
> generated 70 conflicts that I need to resolve.
You should not have conflicts in libjava. You may have botched a merger
ear
On 06 June 2007 14:35, Tim Prince wrote:
[ artimi dot org removed from Cc: line as it does not exist. ]
>> Tim, are you sure you have the patched version of stdio.h in your
>> /usr/include, or are you trying a combined build?
>>
>
> I have patched stdio.h, but it may not be your latest reco
On 05 June 2007 16:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> With apologies for being new:
> In porting a hardware configuration from gcc-3.4.1 to gcc-4.2.0, I'm
> getting the following error message:
>
> In file included from /cygdrive/c/gcc-4.2.0/gcc/crtstuff.c:68:
> /cygdrive/c/gcc-4.2.0/gcc/tsystem.h:53
Olivier Hainque <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> genmodes.c uses the %n capabilities of printf to compute the width of
> pieces it outputs. This causes troubles on Windows Vista, because ...
>
><< Because of security reasons, support for the %n format specifier is
> disabled by default in
Simon, you need to type:
man 3 printf
to read about printf() the C function.
Argh! Indeed I was reading the wrong manpage. That probably means
almost everything I've concluded and said was wrong :/ Apparently,
throwing your two cents in can reduce the total value of a discussion.
According to
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, H. J. Lu wrote:
>> Support for the decimal floating point C extension could be mentioned
>> in the release notes for GCC 4.2, but there it's only supported for
>> powerpc*-linux and x86*-linux and only if requested at configure time.
>> The ABI for powerpc*-linux has changed sin
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 07:29:26AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Olivier Hainque <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > genmodes.c uses the %n capabilities of printf to compute the width of
> > pieces it outputs. This causes troubles on Windows Vista, because ...
> >
> ><< Because of security r
Or, if we think that other systems are likely to also start disabling
%n by default, then it would make sense for us to change the code. It
would be easy to replace it with strlen calls, or, as you suggest, by
checking the return value of printf. The return value of printf is
portable (unlike
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> What is the security issue here? I'm not seeing it. Are they
> concerned that attackers will modify the print control string somehow?
I don't know. We simply have observed bootstrap problems during
preliminary experiments on Vista, found them to be caused by
uninitia
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> * genmodes.c (tagged_printf, emit_insn_modes_h): Don't
> use %n on printf.
Almost identical to what we have been doing internally to circumvent
the issue, Thanks.
Olivier
Hello,
I'm sorry if the answer has already been given, but I haven't found :'(
I want to build executable instructions blocks dynamically, in order to use
the "preparations sequences" in a virtual machine.
I want to create a buffer and to put some code into it.
Until now, I've thought (with
On 04 June 2007 17:02, Christian Joensson wrote:
> phew, a few of the cygwin failures show up like this:
> /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c
> /cygdrive/c/DOCUME~1/chj/LOCALS~1/Temp/cc2eakcj.s: Assembler messages:
> /cygdrive/c/DOCUME~1/chj/LOCALS~1/Temp/cc
On 06 June 2007 17:49, Dave Korn wrote:
> So, what's happening is that dbxout.c is recursing massively (perhaps to
> be expected from a testcase involving pointer-to-pointer-to-pointer-to
> pointer-to-int.)
Confirmed by relinking cc1.exe with "-Wl,--stack,10240" and seeing that
it
Hi,
when I build a coverage build of my software I get some undefined symbols
like global constructors keyed to src_utility_Tree.cpp_90B986A5_564B8955
I did some investigation and as you can see in the below test it only occurs
if I specify -Woverloaded-virtual.
What is strange, too is that if I
On Jun 6, 2007, at 9:43 AM, Gorgonite wrote:
I'm sorry if the answer has already been given, but I haven't
found :'(
Yes, it has, google will find it too... :-)
I want to build executable instructions blocks dynamically
Wrong list... You want a list that has something to do with the OS
Robert Dewar writes:
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> > Yes we can. gcc is written in ISO C, and ISO C says that the printf
> > function returns the number of characters transmitted, or a negative
> > value if an error occurred. We don't support bootstrapping gcc on
> > non-ISO systems.
>
> We
At this point the entire branch has been reviewed by Ian Taylor. It is
expected that all of the changes that he has asked for will be committed
either tonight or tomorrow.
Danny Berlin will do another merge with the trunk tonight and we will
test that.
As of last week, the dataflow branch was c
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Simon Brenner
> Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2007 2:40 a.m.
> > > Or just add a call to _set_printf_count_output in the relevant
> > > place, since AFAIK %n is still a standard-mandated printf format
> > >
Andrew Haley wrote:
Mmm, but I don't believe that the printf function returning the number
of characters transmitted is problematic. As far as we know, that
works everywhere. The only thing to say otherwise is a man page. My
guess is the man page is wrong.
OK, I misunderstood the situation,
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 16:46 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> In that case it's probably not that good of a idea to promote it (unless
> the maintainers are in favor, of course ;-).
I'm happy to leave things as they are for now.
Cheers, Ben
--
Ben Elliston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Australia Developmen
Danny Smith wrote:
Unless I'missing soemthing, this is 'just' a build issue in genmode.c.
GCC builds fine for Vista target on WindowsXP.
So the fix needs to be build dependent, not host dependent.
Well if a clean fix can be found that simply avoids the use of %n, then
that's target independ
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20070606 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20070606/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.2 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 08:29 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> You should not have conflicts in libjava. You may have botched a merger
> earlier. I never ran into this with the branches I've maintained. Try
> copying libjava out of trunk again.
Out of interest, what happens if you have svn file pro
Danny Smith wrote:
Unless I'missing soemthing, this is 'just' a build issue in genmode.c.
GCC builds fine for Vista target on WindowsXP. So the fix needs to be
build dependent, not host dependent.
Well if a clean fix can be found that simply avoids the use of %n, then
that's target independen
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 11:13:16AM -0700, Lothar Werzinger wrote:
> when I build a coverage build of my software I get some undefined symbols
> like global constructors keyed to src_utility_Tree.cpp_90B986A5_564B8955
>
> I did some investigation and as you can see in the below test it only occurs
> I think a sprintf followed by a strlen and printf is _guarenteed_ to be much
> more portable than printf's return value. The overhead of the strlen is
> minimal.
Maybe portable, but how do you choose the length of the buffer to pass
to sprintf! Ironic: we'd be trading a mostly-bogus security
I think a sprintf followed by a strlen and printf is _guarenteed_ to be
much
more portable than printf's return value. The overhead of the strlen is
minimal.
Maybe portable, but how do you choose the length of the buffer to pass
to sprintf! Ironic: we'd be trading a mostly-bogus security issue
44 matches
Mail list logo
