Re: [PATCH] gdc 9, 10 and 11 bug fix
On Fri, 20 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 20, 2022 6:56 am:
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Marc Aurèle La France wrote:
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 17, 2022 5:31 pm:
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 16, 2022 11:34 pm:
On Sun, 15 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 12, 2022 10:29 pm:
No compiler has any business rejecting files for the sole crime of
being symlinked to. The following applies, modulo patch fuzz, to the
9, 10 and 11 series of compilers.
Given my use of shadow trees, this bug attempted to prevent me from
building 12.1.0. The D-based gdc in 12.1.0 and up does not exhibit
this quirky behaviour.
Thanks, I've checked upstream and see the following change:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11836/commits/ebda81e44fd0ca4b247a1860d9bef411c41c16cb
It should be fine to just backport that.
Thanks for the pointer.
I ended up with the three slightly different diffs below, one each for
the 9, 10 and 11 branches. Each was rebuilt using 8.5.0, then used to
rebuild 12.1.0. All of this ran smoothly without complaint, although I
wouldn't want to do this on a 486...
Signed-off-by: Marc Aurèle La France
For GCC 9 -- 8< --
diff -aNpRruz -X /etc/diff.excludes gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
--- gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2021-06-01 01:53:04.716474774
-0600
+++ devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2022-05-15 15:02:49.995441507
-0600
@@ -475,53 +475,7 @@ const char *FileName::safeSearchPath(Strings *path,
const char *name)
return FileName::searchPath(path, name, false);
#elif POSIX
-/* Even with realpath(), we must check for // and disallow it
- */
-for (const char *p = name; *p; p++)
-{
-char c = *p;
-if (c == '/' && p[1] == '/')
-{
-return NULL;
-}
-}
I'd keep this check in, otherwise removing/replacing only the `if
(path)` branch looks OK to me.
The corresponding D code doesn't care about double slashes and neither
should this. Also, the comment is misleading as realpath() would no
longer be used here.
True, but the D front-end does check the path in other places now:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/e9ba29d71b557fe079e95ee6554f116b24159bab/src/dmd/root/filename.d#L787-L803
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/e9ba29d71b557fe079e95ee6554f116b24159bab/src/dmd/expressionsem.d#L5984-L6007
If we remove all checks, then there'd be nothing to prevent either
import("/file") or import("../file") from being used.
There is still no check for double slashes. All I want here is to fix a C++
-> D migration bug without leaving any detritus behind.
Anything more on this?
My concern is that given:
pragma(msg, import("/etc/fstab"));
pragma(msg, import("../../../../../../etc/fstab"));
This will result in errors with both `gdc-11 -J.` and `gdc-12 -J.`
gdc-11:
---
error: file "/etc/fstab" cannot be found or not in a path specified with -J
1 | pragma(msg, import("/etc/fstab"));
| ^
error: file "../../../../../../etc/fstab" cannot be found or not in a path
specified with -J
2 | pragma(msg, import("../../../../../../etc/fstab"));
| ^
---
gdc-12:
---
error: absolute path is not allowed in import expression: ‘"/etc/fstab"’
1 | pragma(msg, import("/etc/fstab"));
| ^
error: path refers to parent (‘..’) directory: ‘"../../../../../../etc/fstab"’
2 | pragma(msg, import("../../../../../../etc/fstab"));
| ^
---
With just this change alone, that means both forms will be permitted.
False. What is checked is the name provided, and, if a symlink, not what
it points to.
You are making this far more complicated then it needs to be. Pursuant to
the KISS principle, let's simply go back to the one-liner I posted earlier
in this thread and call it a day. This way, you get to keep all other
pathname checks you seem so intent on, and I get my bug fixed.
Marc.
Re: [PATCH] gdc 9, 10 and 11 bug fix
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Marc Aurèle La France wrote:
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 17, 2022 5:31 pm:
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 16, 2022 11:34 pm:
On Sun, 15 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 12, 2022 10:29 pm:
No compiler has any business rejecting files for the sole crime of
being symlinked to. The following applies, modulo patch fuzz, to the
9, 10 and 11 series of compilers.
Given my use of shadow trees, this bug attempted to prevent me from
building 12.1.0. The D-based gdc in 12.1.0 and up does not exhibit
this quirky behaviour.
Thanks, I've checked upstream and see the following change:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11836/commits/ebda81e44fd0ca4b247a1860d9bef411c41c16cb
It should be fine to just backport that.
Thanks for the pointer.
I ended up with the three slightly different diffs below, one each for
the 9, 10 and 11 branches. Each was rebuilt using 8.5.0, then used to
rebuild 12.1.0. All of this ran smoothly without complaint, although I
wouldn't want to do this on a 486...
Signed-off-by: Marc Aurèle La France
For GCC 9 -- 8< --
diff -aNpRruz -X /etc/diff.excludes gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
--- gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2021-06-01 01:53:04.716474774
-0600
+++ devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2022-05-15 15:02:49.995441507
-0600
@@ -475,53 +475,7 @@ const char *FileName::safeSearchPath(Strings *path,
const char *name)
return FileName::searchPath(path, name, false);
#elif POSIX
-/* Even with realpath(), we must check for // and disallow it
- */
-for (const char *p = name; *p; p++)
-{
-char c = *p;
-if (c == '/' && p[1] == '/')
-{
-return NULL;
-}
-}
I'd keep this check in, otherwise removing/replacing only the `if
(path)` branch looks OK to me.
The corresponding D code doesn't care about double slashes and neither
should this. Also, the comment is misleading as realpath() would no
longer be used here.
True, but the D front-end does check the path in other places now:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/e9ba29d71b557fe079e95ee6554f116b24159bab/src/dmd/root/filename.d#L787-L803
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/e9ba29d71b557fe079e95ee6554f116b24159bab/src/dmd/expressionsem.d#L5984-L6007
If we remove all checks, then there'd be nothing to prevent either
import("/file") or import("../file") from being used.
There is still no check for double slashes. All I want here is to fix a C++
-> D migration bug without leaving any detritus behind.
Anything more on this?
Marc.
Re: [PATCH] gdc 9, 10 and 11 bug fix
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 17, 2022 5:31 pm:
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 16, 2022 11:34 pm:
On Sun, 15 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 12, 2022 10:29 pm:
No compiler has any business rejecting files for the sole crime of
being symlinked to. The following applies, modulo patch fuzz, to the
9, 10 and 11 series of compilers.
Given my use of shadow trees, this bug attempted to prevent me from
building 12.1.0. The D-based gdc in 12.1.0 and up does not exhibit
this quirky behaviour.
Thanks, I've checked upstream and see the following change:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11836/commits/ebda81e44fd0ca4b247a1860d9bef411c41c16cb
It should be fine to just backport that.
Thanks for the pointer.
I ended up with the three slightly different diffs below, one each for
the 9, 10 and 11 branches. Each was rebuilt using 8.5.0, then used to
rebuild 12.1.0. All of this ran smoothly without complaint, although I
wouldn't want to do this on a 486...
Signed-off-by: Marc Aurèle La France
For GCC 9 -- 8< --
diff -aNpRruz -X /etc/diff.excludes gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
--- gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2021-06-01 01:53:04.716474774 -0600
+++ devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2022-05-15 15:02:49.995441507
-0600
@@ -475,53 +475,7 @@ const char *FileName::safeSearchPath(Strings *path, const
char *name)
return FileName::searchPath(path, name, false);
#elif POSIX
-/* Even with realpath(), we must check for // and disallow it
- */
-for (const char *p = name; *p; p++)
-{
-char c = *p;
-if (c == '/' && p[1] == '/')
-{
-return NULL;
-}
-}
I'd keep this check in, otherwise removing/replacing only the `if
(path)` branch looks OK to me.
The corresponding D code doesn't care about double slashes and neither
should this. Also, the comment is misleading as realpath() would no
longer be used here.
True, but the D front-end does check the path in other places now:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/e9ba29d71b557fe079e95ee6554f116b24159bab/src/dmd/root/filename.d#L787-L803
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/e9ba29d71b557fe079e95ee6554f116b24159bab/src/dmd/expressionsem.d#L5984-L6007
If we remove all checks, then there'd be nothing to prevent either
import("/file") or import("../file") from being used.
There is still no check for double slashes. All I want here is to fix a
C++ -> D migration bug without leaving any detritus behind.
Marc.
Re: [PATCH] gdc 9, 10 and 11 bug fix
On Tue, 17 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 16, 2022 11:34 pm:
On Sun, 15 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 12, 2022 10:29 pm:
No compiler has any business rejecting files for the sole crime of
being symlinked to. The following applies, modulo patch fuzz, to the
9, 10 and 11 series of compilers.
Given my use of shadow trees, this bug attempted to prevent me from
building 12.1.0. The D-based gdc in 12.1.0 and up does not exhibit
this quirky behaviour.
Thanks, I've checked upstream and see the following change:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11836/commits/ebda81e44fd0ca4b247a1860d9bef411c41c16cb
It should be fine to just backport that.
Thanks for the pointer.
I ended up with the three slightly different diffs below, one each for
the 9, 10 and 11 branches. Each was rebuilt using 8.5.0, then used to
rebuild 12.1.0. All of this ran smoothly without complaint, although I
wouldn't want to do this on a 486...
Signed-off-by: Marc Aurèle La France
For GCC 9 -- 8< --
diff -aNpRruz -X /etc/diff.excludes gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
--- gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2021-06-01 01:53:04.716474774 -0600
+++ devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2022-05-15 15:02:49.995441507
-0600
@@ -475,53 +475,7 @@ const char *FileName::safeSearchPath(Strings *path, const
char *name)
return FileName::searchPath(path, name, false);
#elif POSIX
-/* Even with realpath(), we must check for // and disallow it
- */
-for (const char *p = name; *p; p++)
-{
-char c = *p;
-if (c == '/' && p[1] == '/')
-{
-return NULL;
-}
-}
I'd keep this check in, otherwise removing/replacing only the `if
(path)` branch looks OK to me.
The corresponding D code doesn't care about double slashes and neither
should this. Also, the comment is misleading as realpath() would no
longer be used here.
Marc.
Re: [PATCH] gdc 9, 10 and 11 bug fix
On Sun, 15 May 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Excerpts from Marc Aurèle La France's message of Mai 12, 2022 10:29 pm:
>> No compiler has any business rejecting files for the sole crime of
>> being symlinked to. The following applies, modulo patch fuzz, to the
>> 9, 10 and 11 series of compilers.
>> Given my use of shadow trees, this bug attempted to prevent me from
>> building 12.1.0. The D-based gdc in 12.1.0 and up does not exhibit
>> this quirky behaviour.
> Thanks, I've checked upstream and see the following change:
> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11836/commits/ebda81e44fd0ca4b247a1860d9bef411c41c16cb
> It should be fine to just backport that.
Thanks for the pointer.
I ended up with the three slightly different diffs below, one each for
the 9, 10 and 11 branches. Each was rebuilt using 8.5.0, then used to
rebuild 12.1.0. All of this ran smoothly without complaint, although I
wouldn't want to do this on a 486...
Thanks again and have a great day.
Marc.
Signed-off-by: Marc Aurèle La France
For GCC 9 -- 8< --
diff -aNpRruz -X /etc/diff.excludes gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
--- gcc-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2021-06-01 01:53:04.716474774 -0600
+++ devel-9.4.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2022-05-15 15:02:49.995441507
-0600
@@ -475,53 +475,7 @@ const char *FileName::safeSearchPath(Strings *path, const
char *name)
return FileName::searchPath(path, name, false);
#elif POSIX
-/* Even with realpath(), we must check for // and disallow it
- */
-for (const char *p = name; *p; p++)
-{
-char c = *p;
-if (c == '/' && p[1] == '/')
-{
-return NULL;
-}
-}
-
-if (path)
-{
-/* Each path is converted to a cannonical name and then a check is
done to see
- * that the searched name is really a child one of the the paths
searched.
- */
-for (size_t i = 0; i < path->dim; i++)
-{
-const char *cname = NULL;
-const char *cpath = canonicalName((*path)[i]);
-//printf("FileName::safeSearchPath(): name=%s; path=%s;
cpath=%s\n",
-// name, (char *)path->data[i], cpath);
-if (cpath == NULL)
-goto cont;
-cname = canonicalName(combine(cpath, name));
-//printf("FileName::safeSearchPath(): cname=%s\n", cname);
-if (cname == NULL)
-goto cont;
-//printf("FileName::safeSearchPath(): exists=%i "
-// "strncmp(cpath, cname, %i)=%i\n", exists(cname),
-// strlen(cpath), strncmp(cpath, cname, strlen(cpath)));
-// exists and name is *really* a "child" of path
-if (exists(cname) && strncmp(cpath, cname, strlen(cpath)) == 0)
-{
-::free(const_cast(cpath));
-const char *p = mem.xstrdup(cname);
-::free(const_cast(cname));
-return p;
-}
-cont:
-if (cpath)
-::free(const_cast(cpath));
-if (cname)
-::free(const_cast(cname));
-}
-}
-return NULL;
+return searchPath(path, name, false);
#else
assert(0);
#endif
For GCC 10 -- 8< --
diff -aNpRruz -X /etc/diff.excludes gcc-10.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
devel-10.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
--- gcc-10.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c2021-04-08 05:56:28.277743190
-0600
+++ devel-10.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2022-05-15 14:13:15.028032823
-0600
@@ -476,53 +476,7 @@ const char *FileName::safeSearchPath(Strings *path, const
char *name)
return FileName::searchPath(path, name, false);
#elif POSIX
-/* Even with realpath(), we must check for // and disallow it
- */
-for (const char *p = name; *p; p++)
-{
-char c = *p;
-if (c == '/' && p[1] == '/')
-{
-return NULL;
-}
-}
-
-if (path)
-{
-/* Each path is converted to a cannonical name and then a check is
done to see
- * that the searched name is really a child one of the the paths
searched.
- */
-for (size_t i = 0; i < path->dim; i++)
-{
-const char *cname = NULL;
-const char *cpath = canonicalName((*path)[i]);
-//printf("FileName::safeSearchPath(): name=%s; path=%s;
cpath=%s\n",
-// name, (char *)path->data[i], cpath);
-if (cpath == NULL)
-goto cont;
-cname = canonicalName(combine(cpath, name));
-//printf("FileName::safeSearchPath(): cname=%s\n", cname);
-if (cname == NULL)
-goto cont;
-//printf("FileName:
[PATCH] gdc 9, 10 and 11 bug fix
Greetings.
No compiler has any business rejecting files for the sole crime of being
symlinked to. The following applies, modulo patch fuzz, to the 9, 10 and 11
series of compilers.
Given my use of shadow trees, this bug attempted to prevent me from building
12.1.0. The D-based gdc in 12.1.0 and up does not exhibit this quirky
behaviour.
Please Reply-To-All.
Thanks and have a great day.
Marc.
Signed-off-by: Marc Aurèle La France
diff -aNpRruz -X /etc/diff.excludes gcc-11.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
devel-11.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c
--- gcc-11.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c2022-04-21 01:58:53.151586473
-0600
+++ devel-11.3.0/gcc/d/dmd/root/filename.c 2022-05-11 16:30:54.398488793
-0600
@@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ const char *FileName::safeSearchPath(Strings *path, const
char *name)
// "strncmp(cpath, cname, %i)=%i\n", exists(cname),
// strlen(cpath), strncmp(cpath, cname, strlen(cpath)));
// exists and name is *really* a "child" of path
-if (exists(cname) && strncmp(cpath, cname, strlen(cpath)) == 0)
+if (exists(cname))
{
::free(const_cast(cpath));
const char *p = mem.xstrdup(cname);
