Re: Review code changes for handling huge lines?

[David Levine]

Andy wrote:

> There was  some interest  but I  believe it  got lost  in the  nmh 1.7.1
> shuffle. After patching up my OS to  the latest, I found that it was now
> running nmh 1.8, but  was missing the code and so  I tried applying that
> patch locally  against my  system and  have been  running it  since then
> (January of this year 2024) without issues.

> Any interest in renewing a discussion about this?

I'd be interested in hearing from Ken and Ralph, at least, if they're
available.

Just to note that we would need a test suite addition that shows what the
change fixes.  Also, there are these gcc warnings with these settings
(from build_nmh -d), based on what Fedora has used:

CFLAGS="-g -std=c99 -pedantic -Wformat -Werror=format-security 
-Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong 
-grecord-gcc-switches -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-omit-frame-pointer 
-fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection -O0"

../../uip/popsbr.c: In function ‘traverse’:
../../uip/popsbr.c:592:43: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 
‘netsec_read’ differ in signedness [-Wpointer-sign]
  592 |             len = netsec_read(nsc, buffer + inoffset, unused, &errstr);
      |                                    ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~
      |                                           |
      |                                           char *
In file included from ../../uip/popsbr.c:14:
../../h/netsec.h:169:64: note: expected ‘unsigned char *’ but argument is of 
type ‘char *’
  169 | ssize_t netsec_read(netsec_context *ns_context, unsigned char *buffer,
      |                                                 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~
../../uip/popsbr.c:593:21: warning: comparison of unsigned expression in ‘< 0’ 
is always false [-Wtype-limits]
  593 |             if (len < 0) {
      |                     ^

David