From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 8 02:10:05 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C305616A4E0 for ; Sun, 8 May 2005 02:10:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC63F43DA4 for ; Sun, 8 May 2005 02:10:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j482A5Pw087628 for ; Sun, 8 May 2005 02:10:05 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id j482A5Fj087627; Sun, 8 May 2005 02:10:05 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 02:10:05 GMT Message-Id: <200505080210.j482A5Fj087627@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Maxim Konovalov Subject: Re: kern/80742: [PATCH] Local DoS in sys/compat/pecoff (+ other fixes) X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Maxim Konovalov List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 02:10:05 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/80742; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Maxim Konovalov To: "Wojciech A. Koszek" Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/80742: [PATCH] Local DoS in sys/compat/pecoff (+ other fixes) Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 06:01:50 +0400 (MSD) [...] > >Fix: > Specification doesn't remind about possibility of negative values of PEOFS, so this > variable might be declared as "unsigned". My patch contains also: > - fix for bug > - style(9) fixes/consistent malloc checking > - proper error handling > - DPRINTF from .c file -> PE_DEBUG in .h file with more readable output. > - DEBUG -> PECOFF_DEBUG, since debugging code is enabled when PECOFF_DEBUG > is defined (not DEBUG) [...] Please, please don't mix style(9) and functional changes in a one diff, it's very hard to read it. Personally, I don't think they are needed at all. -- Maxim Konovalov