From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by melb.werple.net.au (8.7.5/8.7.3/2) with ESMTP id HAA26966 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 07:15:27 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA28475; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 17:11:45 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 17:11:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <960725141250.ZM14720@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 14:12:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: Zoltan Hidvegi "Re: PATH_MAX used dangerously -- do we care?" (Jul 25, 10:13pm) References: <199607252013.WAA29731@bolyai.cs.elte.hu> <199607252058.WAA31016@bolyai.cs.elte.hu> In-Reply-To: Zoltan Hidvegi "Re: PATH_MAX used dangerously -- do we care?" (Jul 25, 10:58pm) Reply-To: schaefer@nbn.com X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.702 02jul96) To: Zoltan Hidvegi , zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Subject: Re: PATH_MAX used dangerously -- do we care? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"_cWCt.0.ry6.GC-zn"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1775 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu On Jul 25, 10:13pm, Zoltan Hidvegi wrote: } Subject: Re: PATH_MAX used dangerously -- do we care? } } > Finally, the last hunk below makes use of DIGBUFSIZE in a couple of } > places in params.c where it appeared it should have been used. } } That's wrong. DIGBUFSIZE should be be used when a buffer has to store ^^^^^ Ah, I get it ... the first "be" there is a typo that should say "not". } things like -2#101100001011101... DIGBUFSIZE is for decimal digit buffers } only. I understand; you're right, DIGBUFSIZE isn't large enough. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.nbn.com/people/lantern New male in /home/schaefer: >N 2 Justin William Schaefer Sat May 11 03:43 53/4040 "Happy Birthday"