Unique file name generation

[Gianni Mariani]

First time in my life that Linux is actually blamed not Mircosoft! Let's
remember the date.

Slow down now. Let's not rush to conclusions. :^)

 

[Attila Feher]

Gianni Mariani wrote:
[SNIP]

I think there is a security vulnerability with tmpnam.

Standard or not, it is highly reccomended NOT to add security
vulnerabilities. I'd have to agree with the GNU guys on this - (if my
sentence above is true).

Sorry to say but this is spreading FUD. If you do not know that there are
any security problems with a function do not say so. If you do know, please
post its description so that everyone can examine and benefit from the
facts.

 

[Gianni Mariani]

Gianni Mariani wrote:
[SNIP]

I think there is a security vulnerability with tmpnam.

Standard or not, it is highly reccomended NOT to add security
vulnerabilities. I'd have to agree with the GNU guys on this - (if my
sentence above is true).

Sorry to say but this is spreading FUD.

If you know better, please elaborate.

If you do not know that there are

any security problems with a function do not say so.

It takes a few seconds to see.

If you do know, please

post its description so that everyone can examine and benefit from the
facts.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=tmpnam+security+&btnG=Google+Search


Google is your friend.

 

[Default User]

My mistake. I was ideed mislead by the linux man pages.

Well, the man pages aren't designed to reflect ISO Standard C++. They
document available functionality for the programming environment. This
will be a mixture of ISO C++, ISO C, POSIX, other standards like X11,
and implementation specific stuff.

Their advice is likely quite correct for LINUX programming, not for ISO
C++ programming.




Brian Rodenborn

 

[White Wolf]

Their advice is likely quite correct for LINUX programming, not for
ISO C++ programming.

Why? Is that mkstemp a POSIX function?

 

[Ron Natalie]

Why? Is that mkstemp a POSIX function?

Yes.

 

[White Wolf]

Yes.

OK then! I myself say many times to use xnprintf and strncpy and so forth
and they are not standard (in C++). BTW it would still be nice if they did
mention compatibility/portability and say that mkstemp is not part of the C
or C++ language.

 

[Ron Natalie]

OK then! I myself say many times to use xnprintf and strncpy and so forth
and they are not standard (in C++).

BTW it would still be nice if they did
mention compatibility/portability and say that mkstemp is not part of the C
or C++ language.

The LINUX man pages do tell you. There is a line towards the end of each
manual page that tells you what stanards (SVID, BSD, C, POSIX...) the
function is derived from.

 

[White Wolf]

strncpy is standard C++. See the <cstring> header.

Hm. I have to practice my text-search skills. In humiliating myself I am a
master. How could I have searched for this name and not found it? I might
have typed it by mistake as strncopy or something. BTW I have done this
search at least 3 times during the last 2 years. And I am only 34. How
stupid will I get later? At least I have a Guinness record waiting down the
road.

 

[Default User]

Why? Is that mkstemp a POSIX function?

Yes, but even if it was a platform-specific function, then the man pages
would be correct FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION.

Don't use man pages in place of the C++ standard. Even the description
of standard constructs may be described by man pages in an
implementation-specific manner (for instance, errno values that aren't
guaranteed to be set in ISO Standard C or C++).



Brian Rodenborn

 

[White Wolf]

Don't use man pages in place of the C++ standard.

When did I say I do?

 

[Default User]

When did I say I do?

When did I say you said you did?


You were the one who started bleating about standards and man pages. I'm
reiterating, in case you didn't get the message, that the man pages
ain't the standard.




Brian Rodenborn

 

[White Wolf]

When did I say you said you did?

You have answered my post.

You were the one who started bleating about standards and man pages.
I'm reiterating, in case you didn't get the message, that the man
pages ain't the standard.

Yes. And I have never ever stated that they are. What I have said is that
I find it wrong for a man page to dedicate a function deprecated (while it
is not in its corresponding standard).

BTW do not get personal with me. Remarks like your bleating show only your
cluelessness and arrogance. They have no argumentative or technical (or any
kind of positive) value whatsoever.

 

[Default User]

Yes. And I have never ever stated that they are. What I have said is that
I find it wrong for a man page to dedicate a function deprecated (while it
is not in its corresponding standard).

You still don't get it.

BTW do not get personal with me.

It's been my experience that people who complain about people getting
personal never seem to mind do so when it suits their purpose.

Remarks like your bleating show only your cluelessness and arrogance.

Like so.




Brian Rodenborn

 

[White Wolf]

You still don't get it.

I have got it my friend. But it seems you love to argue. You have stated I
do not know the difference. I have asked you for proof - if I have ever
said anything like that. You started to get personal but gave no proof. I
have answered and you have got even more personal.

Well, I am not going to try to find out why are you doing this, but I also
suggest that you don't try to find out what I think or know either. And
especially not state it in public as if I had anything to do with it. Since
it seems your understanding of my words is limited, I suggest you rather ask
if something is unclear than go into some sort of ranting against a
statement I have never made.

It's been my experience that people who complain about people getting
personal never seem to mind do so when it suits their purpose.

Yeah. Is it so? Maybe it is time for you to start respecting people, not
gettinf personal and they won't get personal with you.

Like so.

Yes, like so. This was a general remark. ("you" as "one" is a general
subject, at least that is what I have learnt in school).

 

[Gianni Mariani]

.... love fest snipped

Please fellas, go get married.

We don't really need any of this here.

Regards
G

 

[Attila Feher]

Gianni Mariani wrote:
[SNIP]

If you know better, please elaborate.

You claim there is a security risk. It was not me who have accused a
standard library function to be a security risk. It is not my job to prove
anything. It is yours.

If you do not know that there are

It takes a few seconds to see.

OK. Then take that few seconds to see it and share it with us. So far you
are spreading FUD with zero support from facts.

Google is your friend.

Yes. However it is not my job to support you argument. It is yours.

 

[Gianni Mariani]

Attila Feher wrote:
....

Yes. However it is not my job to support you argument. It is yours.

If you have the impression I wish to *argue* you are mistaken.

I'm not interested in taking this further.

 

[Attila Feher]

If you have the impression I wish to *argue* you are mistaken.

I'm not interested in taking this further.

No proof, bail out. That is also a way to do it.

 

[Default User]

... love fest snipped

Yeah, really. WW has his panties in a wad, and has decided to go into
super, "I'm playing language lawyer and not going to listen to anything
you say except to pick small things that I can use to make it seem like
you are an ignorant fool blah blah."

Well, I don't need to play that game, so I'll do the best thing can,
ignore his ravings. He can stalk my posts all he wants, won't make a bit
of difference to me.



Brian Rodenborn