Source-Changes archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: CVS commit: basesrc
Andy Doran wrote:
> Module Name: basesrc
> Committed By: ad
> Date: Thu Jul 6 14:01:07 UTC 2000
>
> Modified Files:
> basesrc/sbin/atactl: atactl.c
>
> Log Message:
> printf fmt string without %s, from OpenBSD.
>
>
> To generate a diff of this commit:
> cvs rdiff -r1.6 -r1.7 basesrc/sbin/atactl/atactl.c
bolle>cvs rdiff -r1.6 -r1.7 basesrc/sbin/atactl/atactl.c
Index: basesrc/sbin/atactl/atactl.c
diff -c basesrc/sbin/atactl/atactl.c:1.6 basesrc/sbin/atactl/atactl.c:1.7
*** basesrc/sbin/atactl/atactl.c:1.6 Sun Oct 31 18:30:58 1999
--- basesrc/sbin/atactl/atactl.c Thu Jul 6 07:01:06 2000
***************
*** 1,4 ****
! /* $NetBSD: atactl.c,v 1.6 1999/11/01 02:30:58 soren Exp $ */
/*-
* Copyright (c) 1998 The NetBSD Foundation, Inc.
--- 1,4 ----
! /* $NetBSD: atactl.c,v 1.7 2000/07/06 14:01:06 ad Exp $ */
/*-
* Copyright (c) 1998 The NetBSD Foundation, Inc.
***************
*** 267,273 ****
for (; binfo->bitmask != NULL; binfo++)
if (bits & binfo->bitmask)
! printf(f, binfo->string);
}
/*
--- 267,273 ----
for (; binfo->bitmask != NULL; binfo++)
if (bits & binfo->bitmask)
! printf(f, "%s", binfo->string);
}
/*
That look bogus to me. Please observe that the format string is sent
in the f parameter to the print_bitinfo() function.
I don't think we should adopt all OpenBSD's "fixes" without checking
them. It's not unlikely that they have also introduced one or two new
bugs during their "security audit"...
--
Michael Eriksson <eramore%era-t.ericsson.se@localhost>
NO CARRIER
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index