[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    Re: truncate: invalid open64 call: O_CREAT or O_TMPFILE without mode
From:       Ari Sundholm <ari () tuxera ! com>
Date:       2016-01-13 14:05:32
Message-ID: 1452693932.16365.41.camel () ari-lenovo
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 12:49 +0000, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> busybox v1.24.1 crashes here with glibc-2.22 upon this invocation:
> 
> % busybox truncate -s 1 /tmp/whatever
> *** invalid open64 call: O_CREAT or O_TMPFILE without mode ***: busybox terminated
> ======= Backtrace: =========
> /usr/lib/libc.so.6(+0x71e76)[0x7fa878384e76]
> /usr/lib/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x37)[0x7fa87840cd17]
> /usr/lib/libc.so.6(+0xdc3bf)[0x7fa8783ef3bf]
> busybox(+0x6d49e)[0x55f69d7f749e]
> busybox(+0xaed3)[0x55f69d794ed3]
> busybox(+0xafde)[0x55f69d794fde]
> busybox(+0xb157)[0x55f69d795157]
> busybox(+0xab13)[0x55f69d794b13]
> /usr/lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf0)[0x7fa878333680]
> busybox(+0xab79)[0x55f69d794b79]
> ...
> 
> And indeed, without -c this is bound to happen:
> 
>         if (!(opts & OPT_NOCREATE))
>                 flags |= O_CREAT;
> ...
>                 int fd = open(*argv, flags);
> 
> In conformance with GNU coreutils, this open(2) call should pass mode
> 0666 as a third argument.
> 

This is a known bug with a patch posted on this list on Mon, 04 Jan 2016
15:40:37 +0200.

Denys (or anyone with commit access), could you apply the patch and also
backport it to the 1.24.x branch?

Best regards,
Ari Sundholm
ari@tuxera.com

_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]