Hello Nigel,
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 05:26:55PM +0000, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
> Sounds like a RHEL thing :-)
you got me! :-)
Yes, I work on both, I am paid by Red Hat in both cases, and this
patch is needed for RHEL.
> subversion repo - see http://vcs.pcre.org - but it was initially populated
> by loading in the release versions and I think anything in 2006 would be
> release versions only without any intermediate steps.
Indeed. As far as I know the development was not handled by any vcs
back then, which is why I'm begging for help here.
>> (Attached below is the corresponding chlog entry.)
> You missed that bit which makes it harder to check...
Sure, I'm sorry for that silly omission. Here it is, from pcre-7.0
changelog:
4. Fixed a major bug that caused incorrect computation of the amount of memory
required for a compiled pattern when options that changed within the
pattern affected the logic of the preliminary scan that determines the
length. The relevant options are -x, and -i in UTF-8 mode. The result was
that the computed length was too small. The symptoms of this bug were
either the PCRE error "internal error: code overflow" from pcre_compile(),
or a glibc crash with a message such as "pcretest: free(): invalid next
size (fast)". Examples of patterns that provoked this bug (shown in
pcretest format) are:
/(?-x: )/x
/(?x)(?-x: \s*#\s*)/
/((?i)[\x{c0}])/8
/(?i:[\x{c0}])/8
HOWEVER: Change 17 below makes this fix obsolete as the memory computation
is now done differently.
Cheers,
Stepan Kasal
