Re: [patch] Fix handling of overlength pathname in AF_UNIX sun_path

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 1:31 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 08:57:58 -0400
>> In summary your opinion is that the API has and always will allow up
>> to 108 chars to be used in sun_path?
> Yes.
>> In which case I will talk to the Austin group to get a good example
>> added to POSIX showing safe usage.
> Why would you add language to POSIX for Linux specific behavior?
> Just curious :-)

Why not? Do you ever feel crazy when people question what you think is
perfectly reasonable? ;-)

POSIX doesn't exist in a vacuum, we need to harmonize reality with the
standard. If an implementation exists where sun_path has no
null-terminator then it is useful to have POSIX clarify that
null-termination is implementation defined behaviour, just like it
says that sun_path's length undefined. Under "Application Usage" or
"Examples" it's valid to talk about specific implementations.

where it talks about BSD in the "Application Usage." It's about time
we some "Linux this" and "Linux that" in there.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

[Linux Kernel Discussion]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Linux Bluetooth Networking]     [Linux Networking Users]     [VLAN]     [Git]     [IETF Annouce]     [Linux Assembly]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Singles Social Networking]     [Yosemite Information]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux Kernel]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Linux Security]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Free Dating]

Add to Google Powered by Linux