On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Peter Dalgaard wrote: > >> Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>>> Thanks Prof. Ripley and Ei-Ji. I should have mentioned that all the >>>> versions I reported for were self-compiled, and I did so with the same >>>> set of flags as the FC5 rpm. Will add that to the list in my head of >>>> things to report. >>> >>> (I think this is probably FC5's flags being over-zealous, but Ei-ji >>> Nakama may know better.) >> >> Probably not all that over-zealous. If you're smashing the stack you're >> smashing the stack. It's not always fatal, but worth fixing. > > But there is no evidence we are smashing the stack, and valgrind found no > buffer overrun. As far as I can tell (killing a process with no core dump > makes it hard to trace) this occurs when we copy 4 bytes from a buffer of > 16 bytes to one of 5 bytes.
Ah, strncpy zero-pads and so assumes that dest has at least n bytes. This is much clearer from the Solaris man page than the glibc one. So it is (our usage of) strncpy that is potentially stack-smashing. I guess that is one of the things valgrind cannot catch. -- Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
