Hi, "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Speaking only for myself, I suspect that a PATH_MAX of 4096 is enough. > This is because file systems whose paths are longer than this cannot, in > practice, be managed successfully by real human beings, so the limit is > not hit in practice. I understand your point about the vulnerability induced by "long" strings. But really, setting PATH_MAX once for all must be very hard. In the filesystem example, it turns out that not only human beings use the filesystems: applications do sometimes use it in their own way, regardless of human-manageability. GNU Arch is quite famous in that respect: it produces files and directories with (sometimes) awfully long names... Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
