On 14/01/2019 11:10, Iain Buclaw wrote: > Thanks, do you have a copyright assignment with the FSF?
No problem, and no I don't think so. I'd assumed these patches were trivial enough to not need anything like that, but if so then what do I need to do? > Rather than checking for overflow twice, I think it would be > sufficient to just do: > --- > long digit = mangled[0] - '0'; > > if (*ret > ((LONG_MAX - digit) / 10)) > return NULL; > > (*ret) *= 10; > (*ret) += digit; > mangled++; > --- I'd agree, that does the trick too. Do I need to resend the patch with that change, or can that be done by whoever applies it since they'll be squashed into a single patch anyway? Thanks, Ben
