On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 17:58:12 +0200 k...@shike2.com wrote: Hey Roberto,
> safe?. You are not checking any of the return codes. You are only > moving the problem from some place to another place. Please add > checks and stop using non portable functions. I don't want your > shit, thanks. there is also another point here: strlcpy is safer than strcpy and strncpy because _if_ there is an overflow the string will be 0-terminated. I'm not sure if there even should be an error-out in case for instance we overflow writing the "broken"-state-string to a client-name. Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
