From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from second.openwall.net (second.openwall.net [193.110.157.125]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F32624082 for ; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 18:05:39 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 16324 invoked by uid 550); 27 Jan 2024 17:03:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 16288 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2024 17:03:20 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=s31663417; t=1706375125; x=1706979925; i=nullplan@gmx.net; bh=yD7il6/Mab4Z4wFtd3QY+ar0FS/G8s1HJVs1Eip++RA=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References: In-Reply-To; b=C8Pz3SnTVPehDurwekCrvccF0LyObfulAoH1iNquvikFJnOr4GO3BnCeXCVjkxZ8 eqMXWhMCcr1Y3SzNRxX63zfYB/lNqgnEe+zZtOPcGBy1qTKCQhRuMzrU1yIvnCrVx C69rxhs0s+b6q4FjxTvqDTQOWNJ4TwRKMsl4a+JgdgdOOTOGleWUgKoDtJub6eakr EPEHlmwBxz2aS3mTI/MkLtYQRGYNYGgAlqvYJCXINkTjh3acj88DN4otOTil/zhA9 OyENJIehWwMXWEQMgR61OSljv9ldgYVshoylXvx58W5l3FjLL6BXFW8zf7aq1iao6 NgpQwE6gu5NppOJFrw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2024 18:05:24 +0100 From: Markus Wichmann To: musl@lists.openwall.com Cc: =?utf-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= Message-ID: References: <2ee42b57d19761973d1bd12e529a97cc00d829f3.camel@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2ee42b57d19761973d1bd12e529a97cc00d829f3.camel@gentoo.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:1ATefCu7i+UdtHOnN7OWMszKUvvgmYWBuaeGtcU5x53PXcAx3Rt iDZ5OU4Oh0FSFNXFzdM9wyj6D7NmBjgAAYPxVDCxIgvJblvRzkRCWxDRIBgdyNC/Aa/fYG1 tG2+oE/ywOv3l6kCFem9nlEKlZoO9ofPePfu9gMS6U+2AR31uvWxYWT21CmgiOBOvDgMaI0 ShnRz7yWbGvlhqpBHPUEw== UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:GppgHGPNFMo=;rXTzdXcrKwp5GQfJ1mVaXFzJ/P+ +vcAWoCLgsks7Ag1qpLigazJUlrHGWotL39w60SzcO3N042b9O1etqhf7M9kcBy/t1HWNQhf0 miWTZGi/nY9FJGeUX/u6u0zw0qOIDuV/6ovZHZfV1NdysdrXUATO+Q54MW0BP/BDP8pwoodCJ 18+nxuWJFPDtKmtI4NMDSBZt3m5/WdxMKlFTFNRJz0oWl0NJbOtY7mZW+2lkPBJI2YxV44nUA xOm+hdA6YQQKcU+2OvtpS9KWCf+df/bfN/C4CMDazUYYmw/ktIiH2bO8wKbvT/yK3z/pgTfJd oRnw5SbCYdv+Zpoots+dL7SlA/b2Eva5swigWwSB74/qf5ILPujp9aq8nhU3UfAUsPVKL1isH oDFhRyrnxdwl7lRGqAp6ZboCwz3gFmx128FnXmbq8KZVi0eTp7T+LN8BRh6aSQpcp8ORzFynt DhpRs8d+FZ+6cvYb36Td4TU/nAE1+Z1cr9FOG13n/5iXEiX9w0QRMy4UGCiIszdPbVCq93a5L ZstyP8OnMc84sTXVaE4LMc8jOSZYx0ZI1DkNMZVrnULIdq9Ie5Eogw9dL6D98LwJFcspqllk0 sjdoLTlPYIusWzbj4mGKt7qGlJk3M+jWODI3CX/MMDwLObkq0w6zc4iZNfJI11u5l/DwB5720 IUEwzty2UW0WqcES2h4tWH5AKioFaG5pW2y0I7aOE+Akp7hyWCAEc+m1rlDAdahKn85V8b2wf ihjzUOm/PT/RHQJrhoOLODo9R9LKcoTltp7GR1QZ9I/c0aWJvInSBIf/OUIY6gTwq70wjnXzA bW6SbSTUMJgNmGsicvOkYzKCfUtbWdw/6nqWElARFLbN+bma47hOUZXAREUEx3bro/coSImQy VCCLGFiBAJQXW6zyErOMbGF62wpmvCff8a5IZDYcKoMHFuTEQnJ4d7bzy8XcyUG6wk1bWkHre XVffhQ== Subject: Re: [musl] [Bug?] getaddrinfo() fills .ai_canonname when AI_CANONNAME isn't passed Hi, I just had a look at the POSIX specification again and noticed that it doesn't breathe a word about the setting of .ai_canonname in case AI_CANONNAME is not set. Nor does it say anything about .ai_canonname in any returned structure other than the first. The case is entirely unspecified. Therefore your application must not make assumptions about it in that case. The test is wrong to assume anything about .ai_canonname if AI_CANONNAME is not set. Ciao, Markus