https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2086
Philip Hazel <p...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #1 from Philip Hazel <p...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> ---
This bug was present in both PCRE1 and PCRE2. It was provoked by a possessive
repeated character class other than * + or ? (your example isn't explicitly
possessive, being [0-9]{3}, but it got automatically possessified because the
next character cannot be a digit). I have fixed both PCRE1 and PCRE2 in the SVN
repository. It was a small oversight in the code. Here is the patch for PCRE1
8.40:
--- pcre_dfa_exec.c (revision 1681)
+++ pcre_dfa_exec.c (working copy)
@@ -2625,7 +2625,7 @@
if (isinclass)
{
int max = (int)GET2(ecode, 1 + IMM2_SIZE);
- if (*ecode == OP_CRPOSRANGE)
+ if (*ecode == OP_CRPOSRANGE && count >= (int)GET2(ecode, 1))
{
active_count--; /* Remove non-match possibility */
next_active_state--;
Thanks for the nice clear report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/pcre-dev
