Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 18:15:42 +0100 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@corbulon.video-collage.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org, markm@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: pam_setenv() crashes rshd... Message-ID: <xzpd6nvl2dd.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <200212211441.gBLEfCfU041482@corbulon.video-collage.com> (Mikhail Teterin's message of "Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:41:12 -0500 (EST)") References: <200212211441.gBLEfCfU041482@corbulon.video-collage.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mikhail Teterin <mi@corbulon.video-collage.com> writes: > The pam_setenv and pam_putenv are backwards, IMHO. putenv should be > using setenv -- not the other way around. Currently, the setenv takes > NAME and VALUE separately, mallocs a new buffer, sprintfs %s=%s into it, > sends the buffer to putenv, which re-parses it and frees it. > > I think, pam_setenv should be doing the actual "dirty work", with putenv > being a wrapper. This would save some cycles (and, possibly, syscalls > -- from malloc), but, of course, it would not be very significant with > todays hardware, yada, yada... No, the storage format for environment variables is part of the API and is intended for compatibility with libc. Doing it your way would be backward. > Would you have any other comments about my original post -- why is > pam_setenv causing the segfault somewhere, and is there anything wrong > with my patch? Thanks! I don't know why it crashes, and I haven't looked at the patch. I probably won't have time for it until early next year. In the meantime, merry Christmas and a happy New Year :) DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpd6nvl2dd.fsf>