[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: weird PATH_MAX discussion in mplayer's list. (Fwd: [MPlayer-dev-eng]
Re: weird PATH_MAX discussion in mplayer's list. (Fwd: [MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] fix for unconditional use of PATH_MAX)
Fri, 2 May 2003 12:39:45 +0200
On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 05:33:58PM -0600, mike burrell wrote:
> Robert Millan (email@example.com) said:
> > On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 12:23:32PM -0600, mike burrell wrote:
> > >
> > > First of all, your patch is not good. It invokes undefined behaviour on
> > > every platform without PATH_MAX that is not GNU. Not good if you want to
> > > promote portability, methinks.
> > see the thread, i pasted a code example that supports systems with
> > specific limits but no PATH_MAX, using pathconf.
> The problem was with getcwd(NULL, 0); Passing NULL as the first argument to
> getcwd() invokes undefined behaviour, even if the second argument is 0.
> Which makes it a bit curious why GNU decided to have that exact usage as an
The behaviour is unspecified instead of undefined. The rationale tells
you that on some implementations getcwd() uses malloc() if you pass a
NULL pointer. So it's not that strange that GNU uses it to implement
Re: weird PATH_MAX discussion in mplayer's list. (Fwd: [MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] fix for unconditional use of PATH_MAX), Marcus Brinkmann, 2003/05/02