From owner-cvs-all Sat Dec 18 13:51:34 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA3914C44; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:51:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA05235; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:51:29 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA91959; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:51:27 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199912182151.OAA91959@harmony.village.org> To: Brian Fundakowski Feldman Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen fts.c Cc: Bruce Evans , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:50:24 EST." References: Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:51:26 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk In message Brian Fundakowski Feldman writes: : I concluded otherwise. Which has more weight: the evidence toward : immunity, or the evidence toward vulnerability? I can assure you : that this problem was still there under 3.X a few months ago, with : RELENG_3 and HEAD fts.c, but only fixed in OpenBSD's fts.c. And : nothing's changed since then before now; both HEAD and RELENG_3 : both had big problems with fts(3). Ah, I thought I had committed Bruce's fixes, but it turns out that they are just in my tree.... : > One reason I didn't do something similar was that there were binary : > compat issues that I didn't want to introduce... : : Huh? The API didn't change, at all. There was at least one API change in OpenBSD tree that resulted in their bumping libc's version. This change was specifically omitted in previous merges. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message