X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10112241537.AA19140@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: v2.03 refresh issue - passing 3K argument list [was Re: A new bug?]
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:37:02 -0600 (CST)
In-Reply-To:	<3C262E7C.3810.805401@localhost> from "Mark E." at Dec 23, 2001 07:20:28 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> > It doesn't seem to be an "edge" thing.  It fails around 1996 bytes
> > on the "dtou"ed size of the file being cat'ed on either refreshed 
> > bash or the one on simtel.
> 
> I wonder if this has something to do with the glob buffer overrun that was 
> fixed some time ago. The glob routines use a buffer that is 2000 bytes long.

This change is NOT in the refresh - it looks very much like it should be.
I will try rebuilding a bash 2.04 with this module and see if the problem
goes away.  The sizing and usage convinces me this is the fix...

What is the risk of adding this to the refresh vs. leaving the bug in?

I can just retag glob rev 1.6 to v2_03_1 and rebuild everything.
We have around 270 people testing the current beta on the basis of the 
html/ftp logs - experience has shown that most of them won't re-test.
But this is a "slap Charles in the face for missing it" fix - I'm 
torn on what to do here.  

I know I need to update distributions for the kb.  Add this at the
same time?  Or wait til 2.04?  If we add it, do we try to re-beta or
just say this one addition is low risk and release the next build after
a gcc build or something?

- Raw text -