5 ms·

Such great news. He was single handedly impeding the project.

by general_failure 12y ago

jedisct1 12y ago
So, does glibc provide strlcat() yet?
- shmerl 12y ago
  I also wait for strlcpy. In cases when I need it on Linux I just take OpenBSD implementation: * http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/strlcpy.c?rev=1.11;content-type=text%2Fplain http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/st... * http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/strlcat.c?rev=1.13;content-type=text%2Fplain http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/st...
  - aktau 12y ago
    We use the linux kernel implementation at neovim. But a libc (and possibly asm optimized) implementation would be nice too (it could avoid two runs over the data). Not that it's likely to be a big improvement, strlen and memcpy are usually some of the most optimized functions there are.
    - justincormack 12y ago
      In that case you need to change the license of neovim to GPL, as that is the license for Linux kernel code.
      - fulafel 12y ago
        Only if the implementation details (aside from what is dictated by the spec) of strlcpy meets the originality threshold of a copyrightable work, no? edit: Also depends on the jurisdiction, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality#Examples_by_country http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality#Exampl... - and you don't necessarily have to change your own license, a valid resolution is also to stop distributing versions of your program that incorporate GPL'd code.
      - dmm 12y ago
        If they include work derivative of a GPLed work they don't have to change the license. The license just has to be compatible and redistribution has to conform to the requirements of the GPL. This distinction is important because someone could take the non-GPL part and distribute it separately under the original license.
      - aktau 12y ago
        If you would care to look at the code, it is obvious that this is one of the simplest ways to build strlcpy (basically a call to strlen and memcpy and some branching), perhaps I should've said linux kernel-style such that readers familiar with it would know it without needing to look. It is trivial to come up with such an implementation. IANAL, but at what point do you need to change the license of the entire project? 1 line of code, 3 lines, 5 lines, what constitutes using code from another project? If you call memcpy and your parameters are named the same as the parameters in my project for a memcpy call, who gets to declare his license over that line and thus the project, if it so happens that you once looked at my project? The first one who "invented" it?
- quotemstr 12y ago
  It shouldn't. strcpy_s is better in every way and is already the standard. See https://lwn.net/Articles/507365/ https://lwn.net/Articles/507365/
  - ggreer 12y ago
    Actually, there are big problems with strcpy_s and strcat_s. First, strcpy_s abort()s the process if there would have been an overflow, making it useless for most programs. Second, Microsoft already has a function named strcat_s, and it behaves differently than the spec. Here's VC++'s strcat_s: errno_t strcat_s( char *strDestination, size_t numberOfElements, const char *strSource ); In VC++, numberOfElements is the size of strDestination. In the C11 spec, that parameter is the maximum number of bytes to copy into strDestination. People are going to search for strcat_s docs, find the MSDN page, and write buffer overflows. If strlcpy/strlcat aren't available on a target platform, I stick them them in a util.h/util.c, wrapped in #ifndefs. Like so: https://github.com/ggreer/the_silver_searcher/commit/a43dc8751bdaf922ced6cb207e9738cb58302f08 https://github.com/ggreer/the_silver_searcher/commit/a43dc87...
    - quotemstr 12y ago
      > Actually, there are big problems with strcpy_s and strcat_s. First, strcpy_s abort()s the process if there would have been an overflow, making it useless for most programs aborting is correct: unexpected truncation is always a logic bug. Truncation can lead to unexpected behavior, so better to fail fast than to get into a state about which you probably haven't reasoned. If you really want strlcpy-like truncation, use strncpy_s (which, unlike strncpy, acts sanely with respect to NUL termination and filling). Of course, on untrusted input copied into a fixed-size buffer, you should be using strncpy_s instead of aborting. Use the right tool for the job. > In VC++, numberOfElements is the size of strDestination. In the C11 spec, that parameter is the maximum number of bytes to copy into strDestination. That's not actually a distinction. The purpose of the function is to ensure that the code writes no more than numberOfElements bytes into strDestination. Both versions of the function do that. Note that the wide character versions of these functions are both specified in number of elements. (So are the narrow character versions, but the difference in moot because sizeof(char) == 1).) > If strlcpy/strlcat aren't available on a target platform, I stick them them in a util.h/util.c, wrapped in #ifndefs. Or you can use https://slibc.googlecode.com/svn/api-doc/html/index.html https://slibc.googlecode.com/svn/api-doc/html/index.html
Crito 12y ago
> "Ulrich left Red Hat for Goldman Sachs some time ago. It's part of an ongoing plan to punish bankers for their role in the 2008 financial crisis." http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/zzhd9/strfry_the_gnu_c_library/c69camq http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/zzhd9/strfry_the_gnu_...
ciansa 12y ago
Maybe be was a plant, and ensured attack vectors into linux by controlling and ensuring bugs in libc

Such great news. He was single handedly impeding the project.

jedisct1 12y ago

So, does glibc provide strlcat() yet?

shmerl 12y ago
I also wait for strlcpy. In cases when I need it on Linux I just take OpenBSD implementation: * http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/strlcpy.c?rev=1.11;content-type=text%2Fplain http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/st... * http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/strlcat.c?rev=1.13;content-type=text%2Fplain http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/string/st...
- aktau 12y ago
  We use the linux kernel implementation at neovim. But a libc (and possibly asm optimized) implementation would be nice too (it could avoid two runs over the data). Not that it's likely to be a big improvement, strlen and memcpy are usually some of the most optimized functions there are.
  - justincormack 12y ago
    In that case you need to change the license of neovim to GPL, as that is the license for Linux kernel code.
    - fulafel 12y ago
      Only if the implementation details (aside from what is dictated by the spec) of strlcpy meets the originality threshold of a copyrightable work, no? edit: Also depends on the jurisdiction, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality#Examples_by_country http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality#Exampl... - and you don't necessarily have to change your own license, a valid resolution is also to stop distributing versions of your program that incorporate GPL'd code.
    - dmm 12y ago
      If they include work derivative of a GPLed work they don't have to change the license. The license just has to be compatible and redistribution has to conform to the requirements of the GPL. This distinction is important because someone could take the non-GPL part and distribute it separately under the original license.
    - aktau 12y ago
      If you would care to look at the code, it is obvious that this is one of the simplest ways to build strlcpy (basically a call to strlen and memcpy and some branching), perhaps I should've said linux kernel-style such that readers familiar with it would know it without needing to look. It is trivial to come up with such an implementation. IANAL, but at what point do you need to change the license of the entire project? 1 line of code, 3 lines, 5 lines, what constitutes using code from another project? If you call memcpy and your parameters are named the same as the parameters in my project for a memcpy call, who gets to declare his license over that line and thus the project, if it so happens that you once looked at my project? The first one who "invented" it?
quotemstr 12y ago
It shouldn't. strcpy_s is better in every way and is already the standard. See https://lwn.net/Articles/507365/ https://lwn.net/Articles/507365/
- ggreer 12y ago
  Actually, there are big problems with strcpy_s and strcat_s. First, strcpy_s abort()s the process if there would have been an overflow, making it useless for most programs. Second, Microsoft already has a function named strcat_s, and it behaves differently than the spec. Here's VC++'s strcat_s: errno_t strcat_s( char *strDestination, size_t numberOfElements, const char *strSource ); In VC++, numberOfElements is the size of strDestination. In the C11 spec, that parameter is the maximum number of bytes to copy into strDestination. People are going to search for strcat_s docs, find the MSDN page, and write buffer overflows. If strlcpy/strlcat aren't available on a target platform, I stick them them in a util.h/util.c, wrapped in #ifndefs. Like so: https://github.com/ggreer/the_silver_searcher/commit/a43dc8751bdaf922ced6cb207e9738cb58302f08 https://github.com/ggreer/the_silver_searcher/commit/a43dc87...
  - quotemstr 12y ago
    > Actually, there are big problems with strcpy_s and strcat_s. First, strcpy_s abort()s the process if there would have been an overflow, making it useless for most programs aborting is correct: unexpected truncation is always a logic bug. Truncation can lead to unexpected behavior, so better to fail fast than to get into a state about which you probably haven't reasoned. If you really want strlcpy-like truncation, use strncpy_s (which, unlike strncpy, acts sanely with respect to NUL termination and filling). Of course, on untrusted input copied into a fixed-size buffer, you should be using strncpy_s instead of aborting. Use the right tool for the job. > In VC++, numberOfElements is the size of strDestination. In the C11 spec, that parameter is the maximum number of bytes to copy into strDestination. That's not actually a distinction. The purpose of the function is to ensure that the code writes no more than numberOfElements bytes into strDestination. Both versions of the function do that. Note that the wide character versions of these functions are both specified in number of elements. (So are the narrow character versions, but the difference in moot because sizeof(char) == 1).) > If strlcpy/strlcat aren't available on a target platform, I stick them them in a util.h/util.c, wrapped in #ifndefs. Or you can use https://slibc.googlecode.com/svn/api-doc/html/index.html https://slibc.googlecode.com/svn/api-doc/html/index.html

Crito 12y ago

> "Ulrich left Red Hat for Goldman Sachs some time ago. It's part of an ongoing plan to punish bankers for their role in the 2008 financial crisis." http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/zzhd9/strfry_the_gnu_c_library/c69camq http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/zzhd9/strfry_the_gnu_...

ciansa 12y ago

Maybe be was a plant, and ensured attack vectors into linux by controlling and ensuring bugs in libc