Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:50:50 +0000 From: Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> To: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-15?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: expand_number() for fetch'es -B and -S switches Message-ID: <20100908105050.GA4892@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <86r5h4shbu.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <20100831180103.GA92584@freebsd.org> <86fwxt5ng1.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100901222834.GA66517@freebsd.org> <864oe8mpga.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100902114655.GA9071@freebsd.org> <8639tsl5q0.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100902122348.GA38047@freebsd.org> <86pqwwjoef.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100905203757.GA11586@freebsd.org> <86r5h4shbu.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed Sep 8 10, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> writes: > > so how about forgetting about expand_number() and simply introducing a > > maximum buffer size of 1 megabyte? > > so how about just leaving the code alone? :) i thought you wanted to have a maximum buffer size of 1MB in fetch? right now -B can be any value and it's quite easy to trigger ENOMEM. cheers. alex > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no -- a13x
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100908105050.GA4892>