[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#13627: cut: Commit 06aeeec reintroduced SEG_FAULT

From: Marcel Boehme
Subject: bug#13627: cut: Commit 06aeeec reintroduced SEG_FAULT
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 21:23:33 +0800

Dear Pádraig,

For completeness, would it be possible to reference the bug introducing 
revision (ec48bead) in the commit message?

Otherwise, the commit looks good to me.

Best regards,

On 4 Feb, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Pádraig Brady <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 02/04/2013 09:22 AM, Marcel Böhme wrote:
>>    Dear all,
>>    The current version of cut (after 6.12.2012) exposes a SEG_FAULT:
>>    $echo 123 | cut --output-del="." -b-1,999999999-
>>    How the commit introduces the bug:
>>    Earlier, memory of length eol_start_length was allocated for the array
>>    printable_field - if max_range_endpoint < eol_start_length. So the
>>    access at eol_start_length would succeed.
>>    Now, even if max_range_endpoint < eol_start_length, as long as
>>    max_range_endpoint > 0, just like before, memory of length
>>    max_range_endpoint is allocated for array printable_field which is
>>    accessed "out-of-bounds" at eol_start_length in line 534.
>>    Just for historical purposes:
>>    Commit 7380cf79 introduces a SEG_FAULT on large open-ended ranges:
>>    http://debbugs.gnu.org/7993.
>>    This bug was fixed in Commit 2e636af1which itself introduces a memory
>>    leak:
>>    https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2012-12/msg00017.html.
>>    This bug was fixed in Commit ec48bead which itself re-introduces the
>>    SEG_FAULT: reported here.
> Nice one!
> The attached should fix it.
> thanks,
> Pádraig.
> <cut-fix-seg.patch>

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]