Bug #1472
closedrb_f_syscall converts string value to null terminated c string, but syscall structs can contain nulls.
Description
=begin
The following snippet invokes the statfs64 syscall.
bug.rb================================================================
string = " "* 84
p syscall( 268, "/", string.size, string)
string = "\0"* 84
p syscall( 268, "/", string.size, string)
If I run this under ruby 1.8.6, both invocations work.
If I run this under ruby 1.8.7, the second one fails with...
ruby -w bug.rb
0
bug.rb:4:in `syscall': string contains null byte (ArgumentError)
from bug.rb:4
The reason is in ruby-1.8.7-p22/io.c in the function rb_f_syscall
there is this code....
if (!NIL_P(v)) {
StringValue(v);
rb_str_modify(v);
arg[i] = (unsigned long)StringValueCStr(v);
}
In ruby 1.8.6 is was
if (!NIL_P(v)) {
StringValue(v);
rb_str_modify(v);
arg[i] = (unsigned long)RSTRING(v)->ptr;
}
The macro StringValueCStr is defined in ruby.h as....
#define StringValueCStr(v) rb_string_value_cstr(&(v))
The function rb_string_value_cstr is defined in string.c as ....
rb_string_value_cstr(ptr)
volatile VALUE *ptr;
{
VALUE str = rb_string_value(ptr);
char *s = RSTRING(str)->ptr;
if (!s || RSTRING(str)->len != strlen(s)) {
rb_raise(rb_eArgError, "string contains null byte");
}
return s;
}
I believe the original 1.8.6 implementation was correct and this
particular changed should be rolled back.
Thanks.
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=20895&group_id=426&atid=1698
Applies to 1.8.7 and 1.9.1 p 129
=end
Files
Updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe) almost 15 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Assigned
- Assignee set to nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)
=begin
=end
Updated by JohnCarter (John Carter) almost 15 years ago
=begin
Still present in..
ruby-1.8.7-p249.tar.bz2
ruby-1.9.1-p378.tar.bz2
=end
Updated by Anonymous almost 8 years ago
- Status changed from Assigned to Closed
Applied in changeset ruby-trunk:r56679.
Update documentation of fetch
The sentence Negative values of +index+ count from the end of the array.
can be interpreted that it only holds if a block is given. Clarify it.
Patch by: Lukas Elmer lukas.elmer@gmail.com (@lukaselmer (Lukas Elmer))
Signed-off-by: Akira Matsuda ronnie@dio.jp
closes #1472
[ci skip]