That looks good.
.Fn mktemp
was marked as a legacy interface in
-.St -p1003.1-2001
-and may be removed in a future release of
-.Ox .
+.St -p1003.1-2001 .
That looks good too. I think that whoever wrote that saw smoking
something.
No, that is completely accurate.
jmc@ and I discussed these man page changes. He's OK with this patch,
but would like another network developer to approve. So, looking for
OKs.
Jeremy
Index: nc.1
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/nc/nc.1,v
retrieving revision 1.56
Not sure I count as a network developer but this looks fine to me.
On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 01:15:51PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
jmc@ and I discussed these man page changes. He's OK with this patch,
but would like another network developer to approve. So, looking for
OKs.
Jeremy
Index:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:32:17PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This patch adds unix datagram socket support to nc(1). It's basically
the same patch I sent last June (see
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=127627296925965w=2), but updated
for -current.
Tested on amd64. Doesn't appear to
On 01/07 09:31, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:32:17PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This patch adds unix datagram socket support to nc(1). It's basically
the same patch I sent last June (see
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=127627296925965w=2), but updated
for
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 08:48:20AM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 01/07 09:31, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:32:17PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This patch adds unix datagram socket support to nc(1). It's basically
the same patch I sent last June (see
On 01/07 06:21, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 08:48:20AM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 01/07 09:31, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:32:17PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This patch adds unix datagram socket support to nc(1). It's basically
the
On 01/07 07:31, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 10:52:18AM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 01/07 06:21, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
Two further minor comments:
- Can the mktemp buffer be on the stack rather than malloc()d?
Sure.
- I think the man page should mention it
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 12:13:43PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
Index: nc.1
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/nc/nc.1,v
retrieving revision 1.55
diff -u -p -r1.55 nc.1
--- nc.1 25 Jul 2010 07:51:39 - 1.55
+++ nc.1
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:03:19PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Well, I'm less worried about security and also about the fact mktemp is
deprecated so I don't think adding new uses of it is not ideal.
mktemp(3) is not deprecated.
It continues to be safe to use for directory creation or
Fair enough. The man page seems a bit over strong, how about this?
Index: mktemp.3
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/stdio/mktemp.3,v
retrieving revision 1.45
diff -u -p -r1.45 mktemp.3
--- mktemp.3 27 Dec 2010 21:18:44 -
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:32:27PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I think it is important that people who do use mktemp(3) realize that
they must loop over failure (creating a new path each time), and they
need to use a do not use the path from elsewhere unless the code that
opens it returns
It is also important that the caller provides enough XXX to actually
have a chance to finish the loop against a motivated concurrent user,
especially when using something like /tmp.
For us that is not really a problem since our mktemp is using 63
possibilities per slot. Stem selection remains
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:32:27PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
So there is a mkdtemp(), but where is the AF_UNIX version?
Well it wouldn't be big thing to add but from a quick look it seems like
nc would be the only user.
I think it is important that people who do use mktemp(3) realize that
ok nicm, but you should save jmc the effort and trim the lines you left
with trailing spaces in the man page ;-).
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 12:13:43PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 01/07 07:31, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 10:52:18AM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 01/07
This patch adds unix datagram socket support to nc(1). It's basically
the same patch I sent last June (see
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=127627296925965w=2), but updated
for -current.
Tested on amd64. Doesn't appear to cause any regressions to existing
support, tested with unix stream and
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Jeremy Evans jer...@openbsd.org wrote:
This patch adds unix datagram socket support to nc(1). It's basically
the same patch I sent last June (see
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=127627296925965w=2), but updated
for -current.
Tested on amd64. Doesn't appear
On 01/06 07:07, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Jeremy Evans jer...@openbsd.org wrote:
This patch adds unix datagram socket support to nc(1). ?It's basically
the same patch I sent last June (see
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=127627296925965w=2), but updated
for
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Jeremy Evans jer...@openbsd.org wrote:
I believe that for unix stream sockets, you don't need to have a sending
socket file created, while you do for datagram sockets, as otherwise you
can't have a bidirectional connection.
I have no problem with always using a
On 01/06 08:56, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Jeremy Evans jer...@openbsd.org wrote:
I believe that for unix stream sockets, you don't need to have a sending
socket file created, while you do for datagram sockets, as otherwise you
can't have a bidirectional connection.
20 matches
Mail list logo
