On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 4:35 AM William ML Leslie wrote:
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021, 6:13 am Samuel Thibault wrote:
It's not because something is economical that one should want to do
it.
You don't even seem to realize that defining PATH_MAX *does* pose
problem, notably with the actual semantic of realpath(), due to the
semantic that posix attaches to it.
Economical would be to avoid the rich bug farm that is arbitrary but
unenforced limits. PATH_MAX is an open invitation for buffer
overflows on any modern system.
It is what it is. Folks are going to use PATH_MAX.