Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #70236
| From | Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit |
| Date | 2014-04-14 22:04 +0000 |
| Organization | PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC |
| Message-ID | <lihm24$l3q$1@reader1.panix.com> (permalink) |
| References | <mailman.9260.1397511440.18130.python-list@python.org> <lihlgu$hjk$1@reader1.panix.com> |
On 2014-04-14, John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> wrote:
> In <mailman.9260.1397511440.18130.python-list@python.org> Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> writes:
>
>> fprintf(stderr, "Could not allocate %d bytes. errno=%d\n",
>> size, errno);
>
> %d is not the correct specifier for printing objects of type size_t.
I believe %zu is the correct format specifier for size_t values.
>> char **envp_read;
>> char **envp_write;
>
>> if (envp_write < envp_read)
>> {
>> memset(envp_write, 0, ((unsigned int) envp_read -
>> (unsigned int) envp_write));
>> }
>
> I think it's complaining about casting the char ** objects to unsigned int.
If we assume that the author is trying to clear memory between the
addresses pointed to by the two variables, then it's probably better
be cast to (char *) before the subtracted. That should result in an
integer value.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Please come home with
at me ... I have Tylenol!!
gmail.com
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-04-14 14:13 -0700
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2014-04-14 21:55 +0000
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-04-14 22:04 +0000
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-04-14 22:07 +0000
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-04-15 09:00 +0100
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-15 18:15 +1000
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-04-15 10:28 +0100
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-15 19:35 +1000
Re: Python, Linux, and the setuid bit Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-15 18:18 +1000
csiph-web