On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 03:24:31PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 3:16:17 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 03:12:02PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 2:59:29 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > >
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 3:16:17 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 03:12:02PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 2:59:29 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 02:30:41PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco
wrote:
> > >
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 03:12:02PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 2:59:29 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 02:30:41PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > Replaced strncpy() with strscpy() because of compilation time warnings
> >
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 2:59:29 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 02:30:41PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > Replaced strncpy() with strscpy() because of compilation time warnings
> > about possible truncation of output [-Wstringop-truncation].
>
> build
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 02:30:41PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> Replaced strncpy() with strscpy() because of compilation time warnings
> about possible truncation of output [-Wstringop-truncation].
build warnings? What build warnings?
> Furthermore, according to the Linux official
Replaced strncpy() with strscpy() because of compilation time warnings
about possible truncation of output [-Wstringop-truncation].
Furthermore, according to the Linux official documentation, strscpy() is
preferred to strncpy.
Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco
---
6 matches
Mail list logo