> Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > If OpenBSD's behavior of asprintf is non-standard and everyone else is > > > doing it differently, we would probably have to apply the patch. But this > > > would also affect many other places in the tree were we rely on our > > > asprintf semantics. > > > > Actually, we have fixed all usage cases in our tree to be portable. > > > > I have wondered in the past whether we should set the pointer to (void > > *)-1 instead of NULL, because this NULL return is a trap. > > interesting idea..
But then we should also gaurantee the last page of memory cannot be mapped by userland, same treatment as the NULL page. (Not all architectures behave like i386)
