Mike O'Dell wrote:
> if i were to hazzard a guess, the reason the code doesn't use
> mkstemp() is that [1] the code cited is likely well more than
> twice age of mkstemp() [2]and nobody has gone looking for
> things to fix that were still (apparently) working. (big grin)
While it does work, mkstemp is far superior to mktemp in every way.
There's not a terribly good reason to not use it. I've been looking at
how to best do this, but sadly the code needs serious cleanup first.
There is a lot of duplication, and it seems a lack of uniform error
handling when using tempfiles.
> the question about /tmp is probably related the security issues
> and how difficult it has been to make /tmp files robust against
> hijacking.
mkstemp should make it nearly impossible to hijack a file in /tmp.
--
JB
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
