Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

David Turner writes: > If the writer has the smaller HOST_NAME_MAX, this will work fine. If the > reader > has the smaller HOST_NAME_MAX, and the writer's actual value is too long, > then there's no way the strcmp would succeed anyway. So I don't think we need > to

Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

René Scharfe writes: > How important is it to scan the whole file in one call? We could split > it up like this and use a strbuf to handle host names of any length. We > need to be permissive here to allow machines with different values for > HOST_NAME_MAX to work with the same

Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

Jeff King writes: > I doubt that doing it in one call matters. It's not like stdio promises > us any atomicity in the first place. > >> -fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", , locking_host) == 2 >> && >> +fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" ", ) == 1 && >> +

RE: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

> -Original Message- > From: René Scharfe [mailto:l@web.de] > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 12:08 PM > To: Junio C Hamano ; David Turner ... > >> Of course, my_host is sized to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 and we are comparing > >> it with locking_host, so perhaps we'd need to

Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 06:07:43PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote: > > - fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", , locking_host) == 2 > > && > > + fscanf(fp, scan_fmt, , locking_host) == 2 && > > /* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */ > >

Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

Am 18.04.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> David Turner writes: >> >>> @@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* >>> ret_pid) >>> ... >>> if (!force) { >>> - static char

Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

Junio C Hamano writes: > David Turner writes: > >> @@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* >> ret_pid) >> ... >> if (!force) { >> -static char locking_host[128]; >> +static char

Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

David Turner writes: > @@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* > ret_pid) > ... > if (!force) { > - static char locking_host[128]; > + static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1]; > int

[PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames

If the full hostname doesn't fit in the buffer supplied to gethostname, POSIX does not specify whether the buffer will be null-terminated, so to be safe, we should do it ourselves. Introduce new function, xgethostname, which ensures that there is always a \0 at the end of the buffer. Always use