Hi Oswald,
Thanks again for your time.
Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenha...@gmx.de> writes:
>
>>If you're happy to just double the sizes as suggested above please go
>>for it, otherwise I can get finer numbers based on my use case if I
>>manage to find the time to do it.
>>
> i could, but this would be the 2nd bump done for GSSAPI. an actual
> upper limit would be preferable.
Using gdb to inspect what's passed to imap_vprintf() and nfsnprintf()
and looking at the format strings and the arguments to format, these are
the minimum buffer sizes for my (current) ticket:
diff --git a/src/drv_imap.c b/src/drv_imap.c
index 3c85c4d..78f9ba8 100644
--- a/src/drv_imap.c
+++ b/src/drv_imap.c
@@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ send_imap_cmd( imap_store_t *ctx, imap_cmd_t *cmd )
int bufl;
const char *buffmt;
conn_iovec_t iov[3];
- char buf[4096];
+ char buf[4469];
cmd->tag = ++ctx->nexttag;
if (!cmd->param.data) {
@@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ imap_vprintf( const char *fmt, va_list ap )
const char *s;
char *d, *ed;
char c;
- char buf[4096];
+ char buf[4464];
d = buf;
ed = d + sizeof(buf);
If by upper limit you mean what's limited by Kerberos itself I don't
really know :(
Hope this helps.
--
bye
Nacho
http://cern.ch/nacho
_______________________________________________
isync-devel mailing list
isync-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/isync-devel
