On Mar 11 10:07, Brian Dessent wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > Btw., you don't need to make the buffers MAX_PATH + 1. MAX_PATH is > > defined including the trailing NUL. Existing code shows a lot of > > irritation about this... > > Oh, I wasn't even thinking of that... the reason I used MAX_PATH + 1 was > because earlier I had written > > + static char tmp[SYMLINK_MAX + 1]; > > so that the following sizes would not need to be SYMLINK_MAX - 1, > > + if (!readlink (fh, tmp, SYMLINK_MAX)) > > + strncpy (tmp, cygpath (papp, NULL), SYMLINK_MAX); > > + strncpy (lastsep+1, ptr, SYMLINK_MAX - (lastsep-tmp)); > > > I.e. pure lazyness of wanting to type the least necessary. But now that > you mention it, it makes more sense to have the "- 1" than the "+ 1" > form, so I'll change that.
Urgh. MAX_PATH is defined with trailing 0, SYMLINK_MAX is defined without trailing 0 (like NAME_MAX). You should better change the SYMLINK_MAX stuff back, afaics... Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
