From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22611 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2005 23:39:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22557 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2005 23:39:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 8 Apr 2005 23:39:33 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1DK34W-0005Oh-Va; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:39:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 23:39:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] xnsprintf() Message-ID: <20050408233932.GA20587@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Mark Kettenis , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200503131448.j2DEmqZ0029001@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20050313154155.GB18342@nevyn.them.org> <42571449.9030800@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42571449.9030800@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-04/txt/msg00047.txt.bz2 On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 07:31:21PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 03:48:52PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > >>The bootdisk of my workstation crashed, so I found myself replacing my > >>aging FreeBSD environment with a fresh OpenBSD snapshot. The OpenBSD > >>toolchain complains about using dangerous functions like snprintf: > >> > >> libgdb.a(remote.o)(.text+0xb3b): In function `set_thread': > >> ../../src/gdb/remote.c:1066: warning: sprintf() is often misused, > >> please use snprintf() > >> > >>Of course it is right, so I've started converting sprintf() into > >>snprintf(). While doing so, I find myself writing the following bit > >>of code over and over again: > >> > >> int size; > >> size = snprintf (buf, sizeof buf, ...); > >> gdb_assert (size < sizeof buf); > >> > >>So right now I'm wondering whether we should have a function, say > >>xsnprintf(), that checks whether the string fits in the buffer, and > >>throws an internal-error if it doesn't. > >> > >>Opinions? > > > > > >Sure. Seems like a good fit with xasprintf and xstrprintf. > > I like this positive change. > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-04/msg00404.html > I disagree. Why on earth wouldn't we use sprintf? Just because it can > be used incorrectly is no excuse. Mark has a valid reason - that OpenBSD has begun to warn about it - and even if I think it's a bit objectionable for an OS to issue such a warning, we don't get to decide that. He was also offering a constructive idea for a new interface instead of objecting to anything. The question I answered here is not the same as the opinion I offered in your quoted message. Anyway, did you have anything useful to contribute, or did you just pop out of the woodwork to be sarcastic at me? I don't appreciate it. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC