On Wed, Sep 08 2021, Renaud Allard <[email protected]> wrote: [...]
> I discussed with exim guys and it seems they are quiet reluctant at > modifying "correct C code". Even sprintf uses can be correct, it doesn't mean that people should use it. > At least the acl.c one will cause issues as > we have seen with the report from naddy@. > So I propose to already commit > that diff and check further if there are other issues. If you're talking about the early build test by naddy@, build which failed quickly because %n uses were flagged as compiler errors: a nicer clang diff has been committed since, which shouldn't result in a mail/exim build failure. If you're worried that the %n uses in acl.c might trigger abort(3) calls in libc, please check and confirm that this debug_printf_something call actually ends up using stdio support for %n. Note that the clang check for %n might trigger with any function that is marked as "printf-like". That doesn't mean that our stdio layer will parse the %n format. -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
