Subject: Re: is this a linux users' FUD spread?
To: Martijn van Buul <email@example.com>
From: Pavel Cahyna <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/06/2006 23:45:13
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 08:44:54PM +0000, Martijn van Buul wrote:
> It occurred to me that Andrew Reilly wrote in gmane.os.netbsd.current:
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 08:54:41AM +0000, Martijn van Buul wrote:
> >> Now, if only I knew *what* he is onto :D
> > Slipping past the rhetoric, the main complaint seems to be about
> > size argument checking in malloc/calloc/realloc, or perhaps the
> > kernel equivalents, particularly overflows arising from 64-bit
> > size_t args being cast to 32-bit unsigned's for range checking.
> It came back. That code segment *does* seem kind of nasty, and does
> seem to assume that "size_t" and "unsigned" have the same word length.
> However, I can't say it bears any resemblance to "our" code.
But look at fread.c .