[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug #24009] does not check for short write()s
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
[bug #24009] does not check for short write()s |
Date: |
Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:10:09 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.3) Gecko/2008100921 IceCat/3.0.3-g1 |
Update of bug #24009 (project guile):
Open/Closed: Open => Closed
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #5:
Hello!
This is now fixed:
master ->
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=commit;h=634aa8de8f8facc285867100c6c0a54c4ea5e6d4
1.8 ->
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=commit;h=b12a5fd7f645067143523094194db0154a890539
The version in `master' is more robust since it uses `full_write ()' from
Gnulib, which tries hard to actually write the given bytes; the fix in 1.8
does the minimum to make Glibc happy with `_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2'.
Most of the cases reported by `_FORTIFY_SOURCE' are when writing a single
byte to the signal pipe or the sleep FD. In these situations, it would be
hard to handle a write/read error meaningfully, and it can't be very harmful
if one of these bytes is lost.
One last thing: the Flex-generated file `c-tokenize.c' does not check the
return value of `fwrite(3)', but there's nothing we can do here. Another good
reason to not make `-Werror' the default?
Thanks,
Ludo'.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?24009>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- [bug #24009] does not check for short write()s,
Ludovic Courtès <=