From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] test-path-utils: use xsnprintf in favor of strcpy Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:30:10 -0500 Message-ID: <20160115183010.GA10431@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160114202608.GA8806@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 15 19:30:22 2016 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 1aK98e-00040N-8i for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 19:30:20 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751777AbcAOSaP (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:30:15 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:54536 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750975AbcAOSaN (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:30:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 5630 invoked by uid 102); 15 Jan 2016 18:30:13 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:30:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 22287 invoked by uid 107); 15 Jan 2016 18:30:31 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:30:31 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:30:10 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:16AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > This sort-of applies on top of js/dirname-basename, which is in next. > > Textually, it's fine, but that topic is based on v2.6.5, and xsnprintf > > was only added in the v2.7.0 cycle. The simplest thing is probably to > > wait for it to graduate to master, and then apply there as a new topic > > (if we do v2.6.6, it's OK for it not to have this patch). > > > > I can hold and resend in a week or two if that's easier. > > If you have a patch to make dirname/basename safer based on xsnprintf, I > would like to have that as soon as possible (next was rewound to 2.7.0, > no?)... I'm not sure what you mean. `dirname/basename` themselves don't have any problems. It's only the `strcpy` in the test program that I wanted to fix. If Junio wants to rebase js/dirname-basename on a more recent tip (say, current "master") as part of the rewind, this could be applied directly (or just squashed in). -Peff