Hi Junio & Peff,
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 02:44:25PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> > diff --git a/imap-send.c b/imap-send.c
> >> > index db0fafe..67d67f8 100644
> >> > --- a/imap-send.c
> >> > +++ b/imap-send.c
> >> > @@ -506,12 +506,12 @@ static char *next_arg(char **s)
> >> >
> >> > static int nfsnprintf(char *buf, int blen, const char *fmt, ...)
> >> > {
> >> > - int ret;
> >> > + int ret = -1;
> >> > va_list va;
> >> >
> >> > va_start(va, fmt);
> >> > if (blen <= 0 || (unsigned)(ret = vsnprintf(buf, blen, fmt, va)) >= (unsigned)blen)
> >> > - die("Fatal: buffer too small. Please report a bug.");
> >> > + die("BUG: buffer too small (%d < %d)", ret, blen);
> >> > va_end(va);
> >> > return ret;
> >> > }
> >>
> >> If "you gave me this size but you need at least this much" is truly
> >> worth reporting, then this is misleading (ret is shown as -1 but you
> >> do not even know how much is necessary). In any case, this should
> >> be done as a separate step anyway.
> >
> > Hrm, isn't "ret" going to be the necessary size? According to the
> > standard, it should tell us how many bytes were needed, not "-1" (this
> > is the "your vsnprintf is broken" case handled by the strbuf code).
>
> Yes. If blen <= 0, we do not even do vsnprintf() and that is why
> Dscho added "int ret = -1" initialization; otherwise his new die()
> would end up referencing uninitialized ret.
Exactly. While I was fixing this bug message, it occurred to me that it
makes little sense to ask a user to report a bug when it is unknown how
small the buffer was and what would have been the desired buffer size. So
I did a fly-by fix.
However, it is true that this is completely outside the purpose of this
patch series (in fact, most of this patch is completely outside the
purpose, and I am regretting that dearly, as the patch series' submission
already takes almost a month, and I only now get people to review the
critical parts of the changes).
So I simply backed out the more verbose message and *only* do the obvious
thing: replace the "Fatal:" prefix by a "BUG:" one.
> > I do think the numbers are reversed, though. It should be "blen < ret".
>
> That, too ;-)
True. All the better that I reverted that part of the patch ;-)
Ciao,
Dscho
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html