Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 09:23:11 -0700 From: Dan Allen <danallen46@airwired.net> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/78256: strstr could be more robust Message-ID: <16e5d2d5e1683cd7fd3f4c9e8a3da2e3@airwired.net> In-Reply-To: <200503091418.j29EIP4e033478@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200503091418.j29EIP4e033478@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 9, 2005, at 7:18 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > Synopsis: strstr could be more robust > > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed > State-Changed-By: glebius > State-Changed-When: Wed Mar 9 14:18:01 GMT 2005 > State-Changed-Why: > Not a bug, sorry. See also bin/52691. > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=78256 Why are you so reluctant to add one test to improve robustness? Since it is not specified one way or the other in the standard, it will not break compatibility with the standard. So it is not a bug technically - you still could with a single line of C code improve the robustness of the system. Not doing so seems shortsighted. Dan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?16e5d2d5e1683cd7fd3f4c9e8a3da2e3>