Re: [PATCH 2.6]: IPv6: strcpy -> strlcpy

In article [off-list ref] (at Thu, 27 Nov 2003 09:14:44 +0100), Felipe Alfaro Solana [off-list ref] says:

Attached is a patch against 2.6.0-test11 to convert all strcpy() calls
to their corresponding strlcpy() for IPv6. Compiled and tested.

I don't like this coding style.

diff -uNr linux-2.6.0-test11.orig/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c linux-2.6.0-test11/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c

--- linux-2.6.0-test11.orig/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c	2003-11-26 21:42:56.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.0-test11/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c	2003-11-27 00:27:09.000000000 +0100
-	strcpy(t->parms.name, dev->name);
+	strlcpy(t->parms.name, dev->name, IFNAMSIZ);
                                          sizeof(t->parms.name)

or something like that.

--yoshfuji

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 17:33:20 +0900 (JST)
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / _$B5HF#1QL@ [off-list ref] wrote:

-	strcpy(t->parms.name, dev->name);
+	strlcpy(t->parms.name, dev->name, IFNAMSIZ);
                                          sizeof(t->parms.name)

or something like that.

I agree, using sizeof() is the less error prone way of
doing things like this.

Felipe could you please rewrite your patch like this?

Thank you.

On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 11:59, David S. Miller wrote:

I agree, using sizeof() is the less error prone way of
doing things like this.

Felipe could you please rewrite your patch like this?

Done!

In article [off-list ref] (at Thu, 27 Nov 2003 13:04:04 +0100), Felipe Alfaro Solana [off-list ref] says:

On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 11:59, David S. Miller wrote:

quoted

I agree, using sizeof() is the less error prone way of
doing things like this.

Felipe could you please rewrite your patch like this?

Done!

Thanks. Ok to me.
--yoshfuji