Hi Jakub,

>You should also pass PATH_MAX-1 not PATH_MAX as the third argument of
>snprintf, otherwise you risk a off-by-one error in case the buffers had
>the same length.

snprintf ? Do you mean strncpy instead of instead of snprintf? since I haven't used snprintf in my code.


On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:01 AM, Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek@redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 06:34:45PM +0530, Abhishek Singh wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> I have made necessary changes, please review it.
>
> thanks,
>

Hi Abhishek,

the test compiles and runs fine, the patches apply cleanly on top of one
another and the teardown function is used cleanly.

I only have one last comment -- I wasn't completely clear with how I
would like to see the PATH_MAX used. PATH_MAX is a constant defined in
the standard header file limits.h, you don't have to define it yourself,
just include limits.h.

You should also pass PATH_MAX-1 not PATH_MAX as the third argument of
snprintf, otherwise you risk a off-by-one error in case the buffers had
the same length.

This is the last comment I have, then we'll push the patch :)
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel