|
Message-ID: <CAPLrYET-5CGd-k==c7ux2CzHhmMwXd2Mw7B7gj-8n3Bo1NLK8A@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:12:49 +0200 From: Daniel Cegiełka <daniel.cegielka@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: dirname() / basename() - musl vs FreeBSD and OpenBSD Hi, I came across a very strange problem when I ports code from OpenBSD to musl-libc, and it seems, that a lot of problems can be caused by dirname(). http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/dirname.html "The dirname() function >>> may <<< modify the string pointed to by path, and may return a pointer to static storage that may then be overwritten by subsequent calls to dirname()." OpenBSD and FreeBSD: http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-5.8/dirname.3 https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=dirname&sektion=3 "dirname() returns a pointer to internal static storage space that will be overwritten by subsequent calls (each function has its own separate storage). Other vendor implementations of dirname() may modify the contents of the string passed to dirname(); this should be taken into account when writing code which calls this function if portability is desired." NetBSD: http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?dirname+3+NetBSD-7.0 "BUGS (...) The dirname() function returns a pointer to static storage that may be overwritten by subse- quent calls to dirname(). This is not strictly a bug; it is explicitly allowed by IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 (``POSIX.1'')." so: #include <libgen.h> /* musl libc dirname() */ #include <stdio.h> int main() { char s1[] = "/usr/lib/"; char s2[] = "/usr/lib/"; char *p1, *p2; p1 = dirname(s1); p2 = openbsd_dirname(s2); printf("musl: s1: %s, p1: %s\n", s1, p1); printf("openbsd_dirname: s2: %s, p2: %s\n", s2, p2); return 0; } # ./a.out musl: s1: /usr, p1: /usr openbsd_dirname: s2: /usr/lib/, p2: /usr So if you use the code from OpenBSD or FreeBSD, then you should be very careful... grep, sed, patch, diff... etc. everything is potentially error prone. musl has very good support for code from *BSD, so is the ability that dirname() in musl does not overwrite argument of the function? It will not change anything in relation to the IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, but it will be much safer for the code from FreeBSD and OpenBSD. btw. the same problem applies to basename(): http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?basename+3+NetBSD-7.0 http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-5.8/man3/basename.3 https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=basename&apropos=0&sektion=3&manpath=FreeBSD+10.3-RELEASE+and+Ports&arch=default&format=html Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.