Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2017, #02; Sun, 16)
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 18:56:07 -0700
- From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2017, #02; Sun, 16)
René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> writes:
> Am 17.04.2017 um 09:30 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> * dt/xgethostname-nul-termination (2017-04-13) 1 commit
>> - xgethostname: handle long hostnames
>> gethostname(2) may not NUL terminate the buffer if hostname does
>> not fit; unfortunately there is no easy way to see if our buffer
>> was too small, but at least this will make sure we will not end up
>> using garbage past the end of the buffer.
>> Will merge to 'next'.
> [Sorry for repeating, but I didn't see a direct reply.]
> If a host name doesn't fit then the buffer is too small. Let's make it
> big enough, reducing the number of magic constants and avoiding silent
> truncation all at the same time. Patch for that:
> -- >8 --
> Subject: [PATCH] use HOST_NAME_MAX to size buffers for gethostname(2)
> POSIX limits the length of host names to HOST_NAME_MAX. Export the
> fallback definition from daemon.c and use this constant to make all
> buffers used with gethostname(2) big enough for any possible result
> and a terminating NUL.
> Inspired-by: David Turner <dturner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx>
Thanks. Let's have this one immediately before David's
xgethostname() patch on the same topic branch.
The fact that the length of my_host vs locking_host being
different still remains, though. I do not know if it matters.