This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/2 v1.1][BZ #14547] Fix CVE-2012-4412
- From: Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>
- To: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh dot poyarekar at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 07:31:08 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v1.1][BZ #14547] Fix CVE-2012-4412
- References: <20130630164500 dot GF2654 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <mvmehagsfhm dot fsf at hawking dot suse dot de> <20130821151403 dot GB15273 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <20130821160808 dot GA4369 at domone dot kolej dot mff dot cuni dot cz> <CAAHN_R2UwiuNAXyqv7QvZzkbfy7vqAMn1EQ-ka82OFUogChVvQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20130824062248 dot GA16906 at domone dot kolej dot mff dot cuni dot cz> <CAAHN_R2UYzo+N3gcPjUzmkQFOBj6mmKZ2hbHbJW9cfeFthXw7A at mail dot gmail dot com>
Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> I'll just wait for another opinion on this
The empty if-block is a bit easier for me to read than the goto.
I got the willies when I saw the goto over the declaration;
this goto happens to be valid, but it's just one more silly
thing to worry about.