> [mod: Caldera, LST, Red Hat, Suse, yggdrasil, Debian, unifix, wgs? and
> delix? are stressing to make a patch available in their native format.
> If your vendor is not on this list, please tell me in private mail. --
> R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl]
>
Was this patch at all tested? It failed to compile for me due to what
seems to be a typo in this section:
@@ -207,12 +247,14 @@
save_mapinfo(mapinfo);
#endif
argv0 = va_arg(ap, char *);
+ argv0 = arg_remap(argv0);
__environ = va_arg(ap, char **);
__SHARED_LIBRARIES__ = va_arg(ap, struct libentry **);
_SHARABLE_CONFLICTS__ = va_arg(ap, struct fixuplist *);
if (func == FUNC_LINK_AND_CALLBACK)
callback = va_arg(ap, callbackptr);
va_end(ap);
+
break;
default:
/* you want me to do what? */
s/arg_remap/argv_remap/
> @@ -328,6 +371,11 @@
> .text section. This is passed to ldpreload() below */
> if (preload || callback)
> {
> + if(nlibs==11)
> + {
> + fdprintf(2, "%s: too many preloads\n",argv[0]);
> + exit(EXIT_FATAL);
> + }
> libs[nlibs] = alloca(strlen(buffer)+1);
> strcpy(libs[nlibs], buffer);
> nlibs++;
This section bothered me too. I just woke up, and have not taken too
close a look at the code, but libs is declared as char *libs[10];. Would
it be better to define a constant MAX_LIBS? Shouldn't the comparison
above be if(nlibs==10) since 0-9 are the valid indexes?
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis <jlewis@fdt.net> | Unsolicited commercial e-mail will
Network Administrator | be proof-read for $199/message.
Florida Digital Turnpike |
________Finger jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net for PGP public key_______