> On 2 Jul 2024, at 02:33, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 09:19:59PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> The bit I don't understand about this discussion is what will happen
>>> with users that currently have exactly 1024 chars in backup names today.
>>> With this change, we'll be truncating their names to 1023 chars instead.
>>> Why would they feel that such change is welcome?
>>
>> That's precisely what I was getting at. Maybe it makes sense to change, maybe
>> not, but that's not for this patch to decide as that's a different discussion
>> from using safe string copying API's.
>
> Yep. Agreed to keep backward-compatibility here, even if I suspect
> there is close to nobody relying on backup label names of this size.
I suspect so too, and it might be a good project for someone to go over such
buffers to see if there is reason grow or contract. Either way, pushed the
strlcpy part.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
