| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
As explained in `man realpath(3)`:
> The POSIX.1-2001 standard version of this function is broken by design,
> since it is impossible to determine a suitable size for the output
> buffer, resolved_path. According to POSIX.1-2001 a buffer of size PATH_MAX
> suffices, but PATH_MAX need not be a defined constant, and may have to be
> obtained using pathconf(3). And asking pathconf(3) does not really help,
> since, on the one hand POSIX warns that the result of pathconf(3) may be huge
> and unsuitable for mallocing memory, and on the other hand pathconf(3) may
> return -1 to signify that PATH_MAX is not bounded. The re‐ solved_path
> == NULL feature, not standardized in POSIX.1-2001, but standardized in
> POSIX.1-2008, allows this design problem to be avoided.
So we can either not compile, or be pragmatic, and define PATH_MAX to a sane
value, like 4096, which is the one used on Linux and some/most BSD.
This commit also adds two tests to ensure that things aren't catastrophically
broken by this change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Co-Authored-By: jvoisin <julien.voisin@dustri.org>
|
|
It seems useless and triggers 'error: expected external declaration'
|
|
GCC and Clang provide __builtin_dynamic_object_size
(see documentation: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Object-Size-Checking.html),
so we should make use of it when its available.
|
|
This allows the compiler to optimize out the slow/trap path at all
for the typical correct code:
char buf[PATH_MAX];
r = realpath(path, buf);
The change keeps the "unknown object size" case handling intact.
|
|
A few important notes:
* __extension__ is a GNU C "alternate" keyword, not a C++ keyword.[1]
* __extension__ is designed to work on "expressions"; it does work on
#include_next in C mode, but it has no effect in C++ mode; the
warning will still appear, if enabled, even with __extension__
preceding #include_next. This is because #include_next is not
considered an expression in C++, so the compiler attaches
__extension__ to the first expression of the header.
All of this leads us to a build failure while building at least all
Mozilla software. Moz has an alternate -isystem dir searched before
/usr/include that overrides some headers, including <features.h>. The
first statement in each of these headers is a #pragma, and since
__extension__ is looking for an expression, and #pragma is a "null"
expression, we end up with the following error:
dist/system_wrappers/features.h:1:9: error: '#pragma' is not allowed here
Since __extension__ has no effect on #include_next in C++ mode anyway,
and since it can cause breakage, this commit omits __extension__ in C++
mode.
[1]: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-6.4.0/gcc/Alternate-Keywords.html
|
|
|
|
The __extension__ seems to trigger a bug in gcc when there are no
identifier specified afterwards.
Testcase:
echo "#include <stdlib.h>" > try.c && cc -O0 -c try.c
try.c:2:0: error: expected identifier or '(' at end of input
With -O2 it does not happen.
We work around this by only pulling in limits.h when we actually need the
PATH_MAX.
Signed-off-by: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
|
|
|
|
Signed-off-by: Steven Barth <steven@midlink.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If program includes stdlib.h before limits.h without _XOPEN_SOURCE,
_GNU_SOURCE or _BSD_SOURCE explicitly set, then will it always trigger
the trap with musl libc.
This is becase stdlib.h will pull in features.h which will set
_GNU_SOURCE. This means that the fortify stdlib.h will not include
limits.h but it will still trigger the fortified realpath(), but without
PATH_MAX set.
We fix this by including system stdlib.h before testing if limits.h
should be included.
Since PATH_MAX is known at compile time we can also error at compile
time, instead of compiling a broken realpath().
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overriding functions with macros is legal in C but a lot of software
is not prepared for it. Use the extern inline method to achieve the
same result.
|
|
fortify-headers is considered part of the implementation.
|
|
It is not legal to override standard functions using macros in C++.
We may have to revisit this in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is currently done only if the pointer is non-NULL.
|
|
|