>Agreed. But crapping out breaks the silence so that area can be worked >on.
I think just calling abort() is lousy behavior in general. But maybe there's a middle ground; a lot of these cases are just because we didn't want to allocate a dynamic buffer. Maybe we should start using asprintf() a lot more? Although ... crud, I take your point that a small change is a lot easier than a big change. >At the moment, there's many strncpy calls and they can't all be >rewritten to be malloc or something else. Another alternative is >reporting on stderr, though spew from a loop would be annoying. Perhaps >the truncating-copy routine could stop reporting after a few. When >they're fixed, the next ones will project. My concern there is our release cycles have been long, and I'd hate to have code that barfs on emails released for a few years. A quick look suggests to me that we could legitimately barf on a lot of those calls, but I'd rather we took a careful look at each one that deals with actual on-wire email. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
