apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Woolley <jwool...@virginia.edu>
Subject Re: apr_date_parse_rfc segv
Date Thu, 23 May 2002 20:28:57 GMT
On Thu, 23 May 2002, Doug MacEachern wrote:

>         timstr[6] = '0';

Yep, that's way bogus.  Only a few of the mask types need to do the write,
and it's only ones that have, say a single-digit hour or a missing seconds
field, etc, which are already described in the code as "loser format. this
is quite bogus," with which I tend to agree.

Unfortunately we can't just pstrdup because we have no pool to dup into.
We could copy into a buffer on the stack.......

Again, this only affects already-ugly formats, so I see little problem
with adding a copy penalty to *those* formats, as long as it can be done
without impacting the performance of the other, more heavily-used formats
in a horrendous way.


   Cliff Woolley
   Charlottesville, VA

View raw message