A few questions about a package update / policy questions / GCC 9 error

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello,

  I maintain beanstalkd which is a message server of sorts. It recently
released a new version however some changes I'm not 100% sure about.

  When compiling I got the following GCC error.

usr/include/bits/string_fortified.h:106:10: error: '__builtin_strncpy'
specified bound 201 equals destination size [-Werror=stringop-
truncation]
  106 |   return __builtin___strncpy_chk (__dest, __src, __len, __bos
(__dest));
      |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~

Results via google says that strncpy needs to have the third argument
less than the 2nd, so I've got this patch, similar to others:

--- beanstalkd-1.12/tube.c.org  2020-06-10 09:37:35.129224346 -0600
+++ beanstalkd-1.12/tube.c      2020-06-10 09:37:42.761138035 -0600
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
     if (!t)
         return NULL;

-    strncpy(t->name, name, MAX_TUBE_NAME_LEN);
+    strncpy(t->name, name, MAX_TUBE_NAME_LEN-1);
     if (t->name[MAX_TUBE_NAME_LEN - 1] != '\0') {
         t->name[MAX_TUBE_NAME_LEN - 1] = '\0';
         twarnx("truncating tube name");

You'll notice it was already checking the len-1 for null. Can anyone
verify that my change won't cause some un-intended bug I don't
understand?

Finally, they also now support socket activation. Which means I was
looking at .service file which I had setup to use a sysconfig
environment file. When I looked at it, I realized that the default was
to listen to 0.0.0.0 which means someone could install and if not
really careful / pre config or what not have a service listening where
they maybe don't want to. I was thinking of changing this to 127.0.0.1
with a note about how it should be modified. However I figure if I do
that, anyone with this installed and unmodified who gets the update
will suddenly have their service stop listening to the outside world.
What should be done then? 

My thought is I leave it as 0.0.0.0 for all released versions (but what
about epel7) and then in rawhide change to 127.0.0.1. I just don't like
leaving the package like that for epel as well.

Any ideas/direction would be appreciated.

Sincerely,
-- 
Nathanael

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux