Re: Autoconf version discrepancies

On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 04:11:20PM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
... 
> > Also, we not long ago went through the exercise of making sure that all
> > committers were standardized on the same version of Autoconf, ie, 2.13.
> > Now it emerges that hub.org is running a NON STANDARD version of
> > Autoconf: 2.13 + unspecified BSD-originated hacks.  So the output is
> > likely to change depending on who committed last and where they did it
> > from.
> 
... 
> If using mktemp doesn't break any platform, this is a moot point ... if it
> does, then I think it is something that *has* to be fix in the FreeBSD
> port itself so that it doesn't make us look FreeBSD-centric in our
> development efforts on any other package ...

To flog an already dead horse (then again my posts get stalled, so 8 Oct mail
isn't that late :-) (whatever happenend to pgsql-loophole) )

SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS    The use of mktemp() should generally be avoided, as a hostile process can    exploit a race
conditionin the time between the generation of a tempo-    rary filename by mktemp() and the invoker's use of the
temporaryname.  A    link-time warning will be issued advising the use of mkstemp() or    mkdtemp() instead.
 

Cheers,

Patrick