>> - strcat(linedata, p);
>> + for (i = 0; (linedata[i] = p[i]) != '\0'; ++i) ;
> asan2 reported that this line had a strcpy whose source/destination
> overlapped.
Then asan2 is wrong; the original line (the - line above) does not have
any strcpy at all. It has a strcat. (Perhaps the strcat source and
destination overlap, and asan2 is wrong only in that it reports the
wrong call in its complaint?) But the replacement code (the + line
above) implements (loosely put) strcpy, not strcat. Perhaps it would
work better to replace the strcat with code that actually concatenates,
preserving the presumably-intended semantics?
Maybe something like (completely untested)
for (i=0,j=strlen(linedata);(linedata[j]=p[i]);i++,j++) ;
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
