Re: asprintf() issue

[Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>]

On 14 May 2015 01:30, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 05/13/2015 01:24 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 May 2015, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> >> My preference is that we set it to NULL. This will aid in debugging as any
> >> dereferences to NULL will immediately trap. Leaving the value unchanged
> >> could result in further manipulation of an invalid memory location and
> >> program corruption.
> > 
> > If we do this, do we then want to
> > 
> > (a) not have a new symbol version; or
> > 
> > (b) have a new symbol version with the old version being an alias of the 
> > new (so that new binaries that may rely on it being set to NULL don't run 
> > with old glibc - similar to the symbol versioning of <fenv.h> functions 
> > whose return type changed from void to int in C99 TC1, for example); or
> > 
> > (c) have a new symbol version with the old version not changing *ptr on 
> > error?
> 
> IMO we should be conservative and do (c), and document in NEWS, Release wiki
> page, and hopefully the manual.
> 
> There are arguments for (b) given that the manual page says the behaviour
> is undefined, but I do not believe this will result in the best user
> experience.

i prefer (c) as well
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature