On to, 2011-05-05 at 13:57 -0700, cac...@quantum-sci.com wrote:
> On Thursday 5 May, 2011 13:31:17 cwillu wrote:
> > I took the liberty of asking #debian, and they've requested that you
> > file a bug in their bug tracker. They've also suggested that you
> > might be able to short-circuit the faul
On to, 2011-02-10 at 10:29 -0300, Eduardo Silva wrote:
> [PATCH] Add safe string manipulation functions
>
> Deprecate direct use of strcpy(3)
> The following string manipulation function has been added:
>
>- string_copy() : wrapper of strcpy(3)
>- string_ncopy(): wrapper of strncpy(3)
>
On to, 2011-02-10 at 11:37 +, Jeremy Sanders wrote:
> There's strlcpy, but it's not in glibc because of possible truncation
> errors!
snprintf is standard, and should be about as safe as it gets with the
glibc functions.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrf
On ke, 2011-01-05 at 19:58 +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> (For my script, see find-duplicate-chunks in
> http://code.liw.fi/debian/pool/main/o/obnam/obnam_0.14.tar.gz or get the
> current code using "bzr get http://code.liw.fi/obnam/bzr/trunk/";.
> http://braawi.org/obnam/ i
On ke, 2011-01-05 at 14:46 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Blah blah blah, I'm not having an argument about which is better because I
> simply do not care. I think dedup is silly to begin with, and online dedup
> even
> sillier. The only reason I did offline dedup was because I was just toying
> aro
