Package: atftpd
Version: 0.7.dfsg-9.1
Subject hopefully describes the situation. If atftpd is invoked with
*both* the --port and --bind-address options, it will lose track of the
port.
I believe something along the lines of:
-----8<-----------------------------------------------------------8<-----
--- tftpd.c.orig 2011-04-14 20:27:03.000000000 -0700
+++ tftpd.c 2011-04-14 21:11:11.004220334 -0700
@@ -264,8 +264,8 @@
{
memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(sa));
sa.ss_family = AF_INET;
- sockaddr_set_port(&sa, tftpd_port);
}
+ sockaddr_set_port(&sa, tftpd_port);
/* open the socket */
if ((sockfd = socket(sa.ss_family, SOCK_DGRAM, 0)) == 0)
-----8<-----------------------------------------------------------8<-----
Will solve the immediate problem.
Personally, looking at the code, tftpd_port really should be a string
similar to tftpd_addr, and let getaddrinfo() take care of things. This
helps by allowing --port to accept port names instead of numbers, and
simplifies the code by making the getaddrinfo() section unconditional.
The atftpd developers might also want to rename their "Strncpy()"
function to "strlcpy()", seeing how that is the canonical name for that
piece of functionality (just need to bash in the glibc developers'
heads).
--
(\___(\___(\______ --=> 8-) EHM <=-- ______/)___/)___/)
\BS ( | e...@gremlin.m5p.com PGP F6B23DE0 | ) /
\_CS\ | _____ -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O- _____ | / _/
2477\___\_|_/DC21 03A0 5D61 985B <-PGP-> F2BE 6526 ABD2 F6B2\_|_/___/3DE0
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
