Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 22:05:27 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Possible oversight in setvbuf() On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 04:40:52PM +0200, Markus Wichmann wrote: > Hi all, > > ungetc() seems to depend on f->buf pointing UNGET bytes into a valid > array. fdopen() will provide such a thing. However, setvbuf() will set > f->buf to the very start of the user provided buffer. Bizarrely, UNGET > is deducted from the buffer size, but not added to the pointer. > Oversight or intentional? I'm committing the obvious fix. Attached is a regression test suitable for libc-test. Rich View attachment "setvbuf-unget.c" of type "text/plain" (423 bytes)
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.