On 11/07/13 20:33, Peter J. Philipp wrote:
> On 11/07/13 17:48, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:32:48AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 17:19, Peter J. Philipp wrote:
>>>
>>>>> + gid = getgid();
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (setgroups(1, &gid) == -1)
>>>>> + err(1, "setgroups");
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (setresgid(gid, gid, gid) == -1)
>>>>> + err(1, "setresgid");
>>>>> +
>>>>> if (setresuid(uid, uid, uid) == -1)
>>>>> err(1, "setresuid");
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought about it and thought my patch didn't really do anything. So
>>>
>>> Right. This doesn't do anything. traceroute isn't setgid, it has no
>>> group privileges to revoke.
>>>
>>>
>>>> /* DiffServ Codepoints and other TOS mappings */
>>>> + /* KEEP SORTED */
>>>> const struct toskeywords {
>>>> const char *keyword;
>>>> int val;
>>>> @@ -1258,14 +1268,13 @@ map_tos(char *s, int *val)
>>>> { NULL, -1 },
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> - for (t = toskeywords; t->keyword != NULL; t++) {
>>>> - if (strcmp(s, t->keyword) == 0) {
>>>> - *val = t->val;
>>>> - return (1);
>>>> - }
>>>> - }
>>>> + t = bsearch(s, toskeywords, nitems(toskeywords), sizeof(struct
>>>> toskeywords), (int (*)(const void *, const void *))strcmp);
>>>
>>> I don't like the way this is abusing types. In fact, I don't think this
>>> even works. Did you test it? A pointer to a struct toskeyword will not
>>> have the same value as the keyword member.
>>
>> The first field of a struct has the same address as the the struct
>> itself. Still I consider this bad form and overkill.
>>
>> -Otto
>
>
> Hi,
>
> while I don't want to persue this patch further, I'd like to say that I
> finished it on my own, thanks to your input I understand what base in
> bsearch() is supposed to be now. I had something in mind from qsort()
> which also has a variable called base in the manpages and that had
> confused me. I have taken a look how bsearch() in other programs and
> I have noticed that some are doing it like me but wrap strcmp inside
> another *cmp where there is a bit of casting being done. I'm wondering
> if that is the right way? Or if it can be cleaned up?
>
> Thanks!
>
> -peter
>
>
Ahh never mind, I didn't test it. It did compile very cleanly though.
Sorry, I'll shut up now.
-peter
