[OpenWrt-Devel] Q: musl: ether_aton() behaves differently than in glibc

[Zefir Kurtisi]

Hi,

I found a proprietary package stopped working after moving from glibc to musl and
ended up identifying a difference in processing of ether_aton().

In musl, the ether_addr string is expected to be NULL terminated (see
https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/network/ether.c#n20), while other
libc implementations are less strict (i.e. only evaluate the leading ether_addr
and ignoring subsequent chars).

Tried to search the net for a reliable spec on whether it must be NULL terminated
or not, but found nothing specific.


What do you guys think, is musl just more strict here and therefore correct, or is
the less strict behaviour of the other implementations the way to go?


Cheers,
Zefir

_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel