From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 04/10] pkt-line: change error message for oversized packet Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:26:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20130218102628.GO5096@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20130218091203.GB17003@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130218092221.GD5096@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130218101523.GD7049@elie.Belkin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Shawn O. Pearce" To: Jonathan Nieder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 18 11:26:58 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U7Nvy-0001Qn-Hj for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 11:26:54 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757727Ab3BRK0b (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:26:31 -0500 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:51781 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752854Ab3BRK0a (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:26:30 -0500 Received: (qmail 18445 invoked by uid 107); 18 Feb 2013 10:28:01 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:28:01 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:26:28 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130218101523.GD7049@elie.Belkin> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 02:15:23AM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > > > --- a/pkt-line.c > > +++ b/pkt-line.c > > @@ -160,7 +160,8 @@ static int packet_read_internal(int fd, char *buffer, unsigned size, int gently) > > } > > len -= 4; > > if (len >= size) > > - die("protocol error: bad line length %d", len); > > + die("protocol error: line too large: (expected %u, got %d)", > > + size, len); > > Makes sense. I think this should say "expected < %u, got %d", since we > don't actually expect most lines to be 1004 bytes in practice. Yeah, I had toyed with writing "expected max %u" for the same reason. I'll tweak it in the re-roll. -Peff