From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Fix buffer overflow in config parser Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:38:14 -0700 Message-ID: <7v3aca3lpl.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <49E50003.2040907@intra2net.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Thomas Jarosch , gitster@pobox.com, git@vger.kernel.org, markus.heidelberg@web.de To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Apr 15 00:40:02 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LtrIQ-0000Xo-03 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:40:02 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752425AbZDNWiZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:38:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752013AbZDNWiZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:38:25 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:55661 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751912AbZDNWiY (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:38:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC585E35D; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:38:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B304AE35B; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:38:15 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:41:14 +0200 (CEST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F542288E-2944-11DE-9EEC-DC76898A30C1-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi, > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Thomas Jarosch wrote: > >> t/t1303-wacky-config.sh | 9 ++++++++- > > I like the name! > >> +LONG_VALUE=`perl -e 'print "x" x 1023," a"'` > > But should it not be guarded against NO_PERL? The right question to ask is a rhetorical "do we need perl to do this?"