Date:	Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:08:15 +0300
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id:	<2950-Tue10Jul2001220813+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to:	<3B4B0C19.13655.81973B@localhost> (snowball3@bigfoot.com)
Subject:	Re: glob buffer overflow fix
References:	<3B4A416B DOT 14717 DOT 344112 AT localhost> <3B4B0C19 DOT 13655 DOT 81973B AT localhost>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:07:21 -0400
> 
> > Perhaps we should add a test against PATHBUF_LEN right here in `glob',
> > even before you start expanding.
> 
> But would adding a test here be as reliable?

I don't know.  If you think that test might reject arguments which
otherwise would have passed the other test, then mine was a bad idea.

- Raw text -