0.6.10.13:

[sbcl.git] / BUGS

diff --git a/BUGS b/BUGS
index 2f2a651..68cbee7 100644 (file)
--- a/BUGS
+++ b/BUGS
@@ -406,25 +406,14 @@ returning an array as first value always.
   accepting &REST even when it's not followed by an argument name:
        (DEFMETHOD FOO ((X T) &REST) NIL)
 
-39:
-  On the CMU CL mailing list 26 June 2000, Douglas Crosher wrote
-
-  Hannu Rummukainen wrote:
-  ...
-  > There's something weird going on with the compilation of the attached
-  > code.  Compiling and loading the file in a fresh lisp, then invoking
-  > (test-it) gives
-  Thanks for the bug report, nice to have this one fixed. It was a bug
-  in the x86 backend, the < VOP. A fix has been committed to the main
-  source, see the file compiler/x86/float.lisp.
-
-  Probably the same bug exists in SBCL.
-
 40:
   TYPEP treats the result of UPGRADED-ARRAY-ELEMENT-TYPE as gospel,
   so that (TYPEP (MAKE-ARRAY 3) '(VECTOR SOMETHING-NOT-DEFINED-YET))
   returns (VALUES T T). Probably it should be an error instead,
   complaining that the type SOMETHING-NOT-DEFINED-YET is not defined.
+  Or perhaps UPGRADED-ARRAY-ELEMENT-TYPE should just fail when a type
+  isn't defined yet. (What if the definition of
+  SOMETHING-NOT-DEFINED-YET turns out to be SINGLE-FLOAT?) 
 
 41:
   TYPEP of VALUES types is sometimes implemented very inefficiently, e.g. in 
@@ -853,6 +842,22 @@ Error in function C::GET-LAMBDA-TO-COMPILE:
   e-mail on cmucl-help@cons.org on 2001-01-16 and 2001-01-17 from WHN
   and Pierre Mai.)
 
+79:
+  as pointed out by Dan Barlow on sbcl-devel 2000-07-02:
+  The PICK-TEMPORARY-FILE-NAME utility used by LOAD-FOREIGN uses
+  an easily guessable temporary filename in a way which might open
+  applications using LOAD-FOREIGN to hijacking by malicious users
+  on the same machine. Incantations for doing this safely are
+  floating around the net in various "how to write secure programs
+  despite Unix" documents, and it would be good to (1) fix this in 
+  LOAD-FOREIGN, and (2) hunt for any other code which uses temporary
+  files and make it share the same new safe logic.
+
+80:
+  The subtle CMU CL bug discussed by Douglas Thomas Crosher on
+  cmucl-imp@cons.org 29 Jan 2001 sounds like something that probably
+  still exists in the corresponding SBCL code.
+
 
 KNOWN BUGS RELATED TO THE IR1 INTERPRETER