Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:46:25 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Mike Spengler <mks@networkcs.com> Cc: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: named.conf oddity Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911031419420.2426-100000@alphplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <199911030206.UAA39981@us.networkcs.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> It seems a recent update to lib/libc/net/inet_addr.c is the culprit here.
> Any IP address with a component of 34 will fail in inet_aton(). Here's a
> patch that should fix it up:
>
>
> Index: inet_addr.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/lib/libc/net/inet_addr.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.9
> diff -u -r1.9 inet_addr.c
> --- inet_addr.c 1999/10/31 04:43:55 1.9
> +++ inet_addr.c 1999/11/03 02:01:52
> @@ -65,6 +65,8 @@
>
> #include <ctype.h>
> #include <errno.h>
> +#include <limits.h>
> +#include <stdlib.h>
> #include <string.h>
>
> /*
> @@ -98,7 +100,7 @@
> u_long val;
> char *c;
> char *endptr;
> - int base, gotend, n;
> + int gotend, n;
>
> c = (char *)cp;
> n = 0;
> @@ -111,8 +113,10 @@
> errno = 0;
> val = strtoul(c, &endptr, 0);
>
> - if (val == ERANGE) /* Fail completely if it overflowed. */
> + if ((val == ULONG_MAX) && (errno == ERANGE)) {
> + /* Fail completely if it overflowed. */
> return (0);
> + }
>
> /*
> * If the whole string is invalid, endptr will equal
>
The check should be simply `if (errno == ERANGE)'. The (val == ULONG_MAX)
check is a harmless bug (harmless because non-overflowing values > 0xffffff,
including ULONG_MAX, cause a failure later).
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9911031419420.2426-100000>