This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: getopt() argument permuting considered risky
- From: "Michael T Kerrisk" <mtk-lists at gmx dot net>
- To: Måns Rullgård <mru at kth dot se>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 11:48:12 +0200 (MEST)
- Subject: Re: getopt() argument permuting considered risky
- References: <yw1xbrhrw8qb.fsf@kth.se>
Hello Måns,
(Sorry, my first reply failed to include the list)
> "Michael T Kerrisk" <mtk-lists@gmx.net> writes:
>
>
> [why argument permutation is bad]
>
> > Some suggestions:
> >
> > 1. What are the chances of having this feature removed
> > from glibc's getopt()?
> >
> > I realise that the argument is probably: "it will
> > break existing applications". Some responses:
> >
> > a) Is that really true: are there really applications
> > that depend on this non-standard behaviour?
>
> The only difference I see would be that the user would be required to
> pass option arguments before non-option arguments.
Yes, but I'm not sure what point you are making?
> > b) The existing behaviour is a security risk, as
> > described above.
> >
> > 2. Perhaps Linux distributors should be setting
> > POSIXLY_CORRECT in their default shell start-up
> > files?
>
> Doing so would also alter lots of useful behavior from various GNU
> tools.
This is what I'm not sure of. Do you know of specific examples?
(Oops, maybe you're meaning behaviours not related to getopt().
In that case I see your point, and, yes, it's true. On first read,
I thought you were meaning that changing the getopt() behaviour
would remove the "useful behaviour", but I guess you are
making the more general point.)
Cheers,
Michaek
--
Michael Kerrisk
mtk-lists@gmx.net
NEU: WLAN-Router für 0,- EUR* - auch für DSL-Wechsler!
GMX DSL = supergünstig & kabellos http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl