Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]> writes: > On Thu 2017-02-16 04:12:36 -0500, Justus Winter wrote: >> That is still wrong. The length of the path of the socket is not >> limited in any way, the length of the path passed to connect is. > > this is a clever approach to *connect* to such a socket,
Yes. > on some systems. Well, I tested it on all systems I had access to at that time. I could have written a small test program, and asked people to run it on systems we don't have access to. But we never got to that point :( > But if you ever use getsockname (e.g. common/sysutils.c and > dirmngr/dns.c), the long socket path names are bound to fail on *any* > system, right? Yes. And iirc I went over why we use getsockname and figured that we could do away with them. Justus
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
