Date: 17 Jun 2001 11:30:18 +0200 From: Assar Westerlund <assar@freebsd.org> To: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> Cc: freebsd-audit@freebsd.org, jlemon@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GLOB_LIMIT vs GLOB_MAXPATH Message-ID: <5l66dvcv2t.fsf@assaris.sics.se> In-Reply-To: Peter Pentchev's message of "Sun, 17 Jun 2001 12:20:17 %2B0300" References: <5ld783cvnq.fsf@assaris.sics.se> <20010617122017.F777@ringworld.oblivion.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> writes: > I wonder if this would require revision of the glob(3) advisory.. I don't see why. It says that 4.3 and above doesn't have the problem and that continues to be the case. The patches apply to older versoins. > And I wonder if this would qualify as an API change on the -stable > branch, which seems to be frowned upon by some, or if it wouldn't > be MFC'd, which would cause an API incompatibility between -stable > and -current :) Well, compatibility between -current and -stable should be a goal I think, hence if this goes in it should also be MFC:ed. I agree that it changes the API and I wish I had found this issue before 4.3 but I didn't. Either you can argue for nobody (except me/us :-) using this API or just leave the GLOB_MAXPATH for backwards compatibility. /assar To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5l66dvcv2t.fsf>