On Thu, Dec 20, 2018, at 2:53 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Hugo Beauzée-Luyssen wrote:
> > 12-14 19:10:02.633 F DEBUG   : pid: 31664, tid: 32389, name: VlcObject  >>> 
> > org.videolan.vlc <<<
> > 12-14 19:10:02.633 F DEBUG   : signal 6 (SIGABRT), code -1 (SI_QUEUE), 
> > fault addr --------
> > 12-14 19:10:02.633 F DEBUG   : Abort message: 'FORTIFY: %n not allowed on 
> > Android'
> 
> Indeed, %n in *printf is not allowed on Android, see
> https://android.googlesource.com/platform/bionic/+/master/libc/stdio/vfprintf.cpp
> https://android.googlesource.com/platform/bionic/+/master/docs/status.md
> 
> > diff --git a/lib/vasnprintf.c b/lib/vasnprintf.c
> > index af3fcd1c7..e41d5f706 100644
> > --- a/lib/vasnprintf.c
> > +++ b/lib/vasnprintf.c
> > @@ -4874,7 +4874,8 @@ VASNPRINTF (DCHAR_T *resultbuf, size_t *lengthp,
> >  # if ! (((__GLIBC__ > 2 || (__GLIBC__ == 2 && __GLIBC_MINOR__ >= 3))       
> >  \
> >           && !defined __UCLIBC__)                                           
> >  \
> >          || (defined __APPLE__ && defined __MACH__)                         
> >  \
> > -        || (defined _WIN32 && ! defined __CYGWIN__))
> > +        || (defined _WIN32 && ! defined __CYGWIN__)                        
> >  \
> > +        || defined __ANDROID__)
> >                  fbp[1] = '%';
> >                  fbp[2] = 'n';
> >                  fbp[3] = '\0';
> 
> The patch looks good at first sight. But when you look at the comments a
> couple of lines before it, you see that one can avoid %n only
> if snprintf behaves well enough. To this effect, can you please report
> the configure results (from a *native* Android compilation, not a cross-
> compilation) of these tests:
> 
> 1 = checking whether printf supports size specifiers as in C99...
> 2 = checking whether printf supports 'long double' arguments...
> 3 = checking whether printf supports infinite 'double' arguments...
> 4 = checking whether printf supports infinite 'long double' arguments...
> 5 = checking whether printf supports the 'a' and 'A' directives...
> 6 = checking whether printf supports the 'F' directive...
> 7 = checking whether printf supports the 'n' directive...
> 8 = checking whether printf supports the 'ls' directive...
> 9 = checking whether printf supports POSIX/XSI format strings with 
> positions...
> 10 = checking whether printf supports the grouping flag...
> 11 = checking whether printf supports the left-adjust flag correctly...
> 12 = checking whether printf supports the zero flag correctly...
> 13 = checking whether printf supports large precisions...
> 14 = checking whether printf survives out-of-memory conditions...
> 15 = checking for snprintf...
> 16 = checking whether snprintf truncates the result as in C99...
> 17 = checking whether snprintf returns a byte count as in C99...
> 18 = checking whether snprintf fully supports the 'n' directive...
> 19 = checking whether snprintf respects a size of 1...
> 20 = checking whether vsnprintf respects a zero size as in C99...
> 
> You should find these in the configure output of any package that
> uses gnulib's 'vasnprintf' module. If you don't have one at hand,
> create one using
>   ./gnulib-tool --create-testdir --dir=testdir --single-configure vasnprintf
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Bruno
> 

Hi,

I'm probably missing something, but for me this only seems to test for 
snprintf/printf/vasnprintf availability (including running configure in the 
generated test directory)

Regards,

-- 
  Hugo Beauzée-Luyssen
  h...@beauzee.fr

Reply via email to