2010/2/8 Vadim Zhukov :
> Looks like I was just lucky. :) I do not use malloc.conf. And mktemp(1)
> failed for me only sometimes (I'm using it for generating
> passwords: "mktemp XX"). After a few crashes I realized that it
> hurts me too much... Do not remember what snapshot it was, though
On 8 February 2010 c. 23:50:53 Philip Guenther wrote:
> 2010/2/8 Vadim Zhukov :
> > Thank you for your attention. And sorry, but I think that your
> > version is wrong: in case of only one "X" you'll have "tries" set to
> > 1 instead of NUM_CHARS.
>
>
>
> Time to write some regress tests for mktem
2010/2/8 Vadim Zhukov :
> Thank you for your attention. And sorry, but I think that your version is
> wrong: in case of only one "X" you'll have "tries" set to 1 instead of
> NUM_CHARS.
Time to write some regress tests for mktemp obviously. Do you happen
to have a program reliably demonstrates
On 8 February 2010 c. 21:00:53 Philip Guenther wrote:
> 2010/1/27 Vadim Zhukov :
> > Current implementation of mktemp_internal() access memory before the
> > string given when the whole template given consists of 'X'
> > characters.
>
> Nice catch! I've committed a slightly different fix, but the
2010/1/27 Vadim Zhukov :
> Current implementation of mktemp_internal() access memory before the
> string given when the whole template given consists of 'X' characters.
Nice catch! I've committed a slightly different fix, but the base
idea is the same, thanks!
Philip Guenther
Hello all.
Current implementation of mktemp_internal() access memory before the
string given when the whole template given consists of 'X' characters.
First hunk of patch also removes extra check: "strlen() == 0" is done
anyway for non-error flow, so "*path == '\0'" does not give any actual
sp
