Package: unixcw
Severity: important
Version: 2.3-3
Tags: patch
Hi,
the current version fails to build on GNU/kFreeBSD.
It incorrectly assumes that number of signals
is given by macro SIGRTMAX.
Moreover there is "off by one" bug even on Linux,
as signal numbers starts with 1,
see also /usr/include/bits/signum.h.
Current code reject perfectly valid signal 64 in
cw_register_signal_handler() and cw_unregister_signal_handler()
with EINVAL.
Please find attached patch to fix all of that.
There may be still problem with cw_register_signal_handler()
and cw_unregister_signal_handler() for signal number 0.
IMHO, it should be rejected directly with EINVAL.
It would also be nice if you can inform upstream
about this issues.
Thanks in advance
Petr--- unixcw-2.3.orig/src/cwlib/cwlib.c
+++ unixcw-2.3/src/cwlib/cwlib.c
@@ -3008,7 +3008,18 @@
* initialized dynamically to SIG_DFL (if SIG_DFL is not NULL, which it
* seems that it is in most cases).
*/
-static void (*cw_signal_callbacks[RTSIG_MAX]) (int);
+
+#if defined(NSIG)
+#define SIG_MAX (NSIG)
+#elif defined(_NSIG)
+#define SIG_MAX (_NSIG)
+#elif defined(RTSIG_MAX)
+#define SIG_MAX ((RTSIG_MAX)+1)
+#else
+#error unknown number of signals
+#endif
+
+static void (*cw_signal_callbacks[SIG_MAX]) (int);
/**
@@ -3194,14 +3205,14 @@
{
int index;
- for (index = 0; index < RTSIG_MAX; index++)
+ for (index = 0; index < SIG_MAX; index++)
cw_signal_callbacks[index] = SIG_DFL;
is_initialized = TRUE;
}
/* Reject invalid signal numbers, and SIGALRM, which we use internally. */
- if (signal_number < 0 || signal_number >= RTSIG_MAX
+ if (signal_number < 0 || signal_number >= SIG_MAX
|| signal_number == SIGALRM)
{
errno = EINVAL;
@@ -3256,7 +3267,7 @@
int status;
/* As above, reject unacceptable signal numbers. */
- if (signal_number < 0 || signal_number >= RTSIG_MAX
+ if (signal_number < 0 || signal_number >= SIG_MAX
|| signal_number == SIGALRM)
{
errno = EINVAL;
