This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: about the usage of sprintf in gdb, specifically in gdb/remote.c


On Thu, 26 May 2005, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> > But I need to design a scenario to verify that.

It seems that most target don't implement "to_extra_thread_info" (ok, at 
least in i386 and ppc), gdbserver will return NULL to "qThreadExtraInfo".
So I can't verify this yet.  

> That's my point exactly: you don't need to go to such lengths.  If it
> isn't 100% obvious that no overflow is possible, we should remove
> sprintf in favor of safer functions.

Maybe you are right.  I will post a patch in a while. 

Cheers
- Wu Zhou


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]