Re: [Nbd] [PATCH] Docs: proto.md: Clarify NUL in export name
Thanks, applied.
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:16:48AM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
> Clarify that
>
> * The name is not NUL terminated (not just that the length
> 'does not include NUL termination' which might be taken to mean
> there is NUL termination but the length doesn't include it.
>
> * The name cannot itself include embedded NUL characters (despite
> it not being NUL terminated).
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Bligh <alex@...872...>
> ---
> doc/proto.md | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/doc/proto.md b/doc/proto.md
> index c1e05c5..7729051 100644
> --- a/doc/proto.md
> +++ b/doc/proto.md
> @@ -292,7 +292,8 @@ of the newstyle negotiation.
> haggling, and proceed to the transmission phase. Data: name of the
> export, free-form UTF-8 text (subject to limitations by server
> implementation). The length of the name is determined from the
> - option header, and does NOT include a NUL terminator. If the
> + option header. The name is not NUL terminated, and may not
> + contain embedded NUL characters. If the
> chosen export does not exist or requirements for the chosen export
> are not met (e.g., the client did not negotiate TLS for an export
> where the server requires it), the server should close the
> --
> 1.9.1
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Transform Data into Opportunity.
> Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
> Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
> Click to learn more.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785471&iu=/4140
> _______________________________________________
> Nbd-general mailing list
> Nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nbd-general
>
--
< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
-- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12
Reply to: