From owner-freebsd-bugs Sun May 13 18:40:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E770C37B43C for ; Sun, 13 May 2001 18:40:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f4E1e3J14981; Sun, 13 May 2001 18:40:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 18:40:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200105140140.f4E1e3J14981@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Cyrille Lefevre Subject: Re: bin/27258: getty didn't check if if= isn't empty Reply-To: Cyrille Lefevre Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR bin/27258; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Cyrille Lefevre To: Bruce Evans Cc: Cyrille Lefevre , FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bin/27258: getty didn't check if if= isn't empty Date: 14 May 2001 03:36:16 +0200 Bruce Evans writes: [snip] > > - if (first_time && IF) { > > + if (first_time && IF && *IF) { > > int fd; > > > > if ((fd = open(IF, O_RDONLY)) != -1) { > > This is safer than `:if=/bin/sh:'. It just causes the open to fail > just like for any other nonexistent file (POSIX standard). yes, but this syscall isn't needed, so, why not to get rid of it if if= is empty ? Cyrille. -- home: mailto:clefevre@poboxes.com UNIX is user-friendly; it's just particular work: mailto:Cyrille.Lefevre@edf.fr about who it chooses to be friends with. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message