@@ -188,25 +197,36 @@ static void do_pattmatch(ap_filter_t *f,
int left = bytes;
const char *pos = buff;
char *repl;
+ apr_size_t space_left = AP_SUBST_MAX_LINE_LENGTH;
while (!ap_regexec_len(script->regexp, pos, left,
AP_MAX_REG_MATCH, regm, 0)) {
+ apr_status_t rv;
have_match = 1;
if (script->flatten&& !force_quick) {
/* copy bytes before the match */
if (regm[0].rm_so> 0)
ap_varbuf_strmemcat(&vb, pos,
regm[0].rm_so);
/* add replacement string */
- ap_varbuf_regsub(&vb,
script->replacement, pos,
- AP_MAX_REG_MATCH, regm, 0);
+ rv = ap_varbuf_regsub(&vb,
script->replacement, pos,
+ AP_MAX_REG_MATCH,
regm,
+
AP_SUBST_MAX_LINE_LENGTH - vb.strlen);
+ if (rv != APR_SUCCESS)
+ return rv;
}
else {
- ap_pregsub_ex(pool,&repl,
script->replacement, pos,
- AP_MAX_REG_MATCH, regm,
0);
+ apr_size_t repl_len;
+ rv = ap_pregsub_ex(pool,&repl,
+ script->replacement, pos,
+ AP_MAX_REG_MATCH, regm,
+ space_left);
+ if (rv != APR_SUCCESS)
+ return rv;
len = (apr_size_t) (regm[0].rm_eo -
regm[0].rm_so);
+ repl_len = strlen(repl);
+ space_left -= len + repl_len;
Isn't it sufficient to reduce space_left only by repl_len?
IMHO we only allocate repl_len new memory in ap_pregsub_ex and not len
+ repl_len or am I wrong here?
