Xref: utzoo comp.bugs.4bsd:1668 comp.std.c:4185 comp.lang.c:35495
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!tkou02.enet.dec.com!jit345!diamond
From: diamond@jit345.swstokyo.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.bugs.4bsd,comp.std.c,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Safe coding practices (was Re: Bug in users command)
Message-ID: <1991Jan25.021929.10512@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Date: 25 Jan 91 02:19:29 GMT
References: <1991Jan24.060707.22566@tkou02.enet.dec.com> <22870@well.sf.ca.us>
Sender: news@tkou02.enet.dec.com (USENET News System)
Reply-To: diamond@jit345.enet@tkou02.enet.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo
Lines: 37

In article <22870@well.sf.ca.us> Jef Poskanzer <jef@well.sf.ca.us> writes:
>In the referenced message, diamond@jit345.enet@tkou02.enet.dec.com (Norman Diamond) wrote:
>}In article <22855@well.sf.ca.us> Jef Poskanzer <jef@well.sf.ca.us> writes:
>}>    #define MAXNAMES 1000
>}>    static char users[MAXNAMES][UT_NAMESIZE+1];
>}>    (void) strncpy( users[nusers], u.ut_name, UT_NAMESIZE );
>}>    users[nusers][UT_NAMESIZE] = '\0';
>}>And yes, this will fail if more than 1000 users are logged in at
>}>the same time.  Imagine how concerned I am.
>}
>}Uh, maybe equally concerned as ...
>
>Gosh, in ten years, if every trend in computer usage magically reverses
>itself, I'll get a message telling me to change the number from 1000 to
>10000.

Suppose someone starts logging NFS clients?  Or the clients of some other
service?  1000 would already be a bit small for that.

>Yes, it does check for overflow.

Uh, you mean that it doesn't abort on overflow, but only gives inaccurate
answers.  OK, so your example does about 1/4 of what a good example would do.

>Dan Bernstein's hack of reading utmp twice and allocating
>50 extra slots in case more users log in between the two is, when you
>come down to it, *no better*.  Just more complicated.  Worse, in fact,
>since he *doesn't* check for overflow.

If I had seen that posting, and if Mr. Bernstein had made some claim about
adequacy, and if I had the time, I would have criticized that too.  In fact,
if I had seen the posting, and given the hypocrisy that you attributed to
him (which I deleted, sorry), then it wouldn't matter if I had the time;
I'd've flamed him ;-) .  But I didn't see it, sorry.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@tkov50.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.