[PATCH rebase] peflags: Fix ULONG range checks

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Aug  8 10:06, Christian Franke via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> > Hi Christian,
> > 
> > On Aug  7 16:07, Christian Franke via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> > > Minor issue found during tests of the upcoming 'peflags --timestamp' patch.
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Regards,
> > > Christian
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > diff --git a/peflags.c b/peflags.c
> > > index 93eaa0b..d98b121 100644
> > > --- a/peflags.c
> > > +++ b/peflags.c
> > > @@ -30,7 +30,6 @@
> > >   #include <unistd.h>
> > >   #include <getopt.h>
> > >   #include <errno.h>
> > > -#include <limits.h>
> > >   #if defined (__CYGWIN__) || defined (__MSYS__)
> > >   #include <sys/mman.h>
> > >   #endif
> > > @@ -598,7 +597,7 @@ handle_num_option (const char *option_name,
> > >   	   || sizeof_vals[option_index].value > 0x0000ffffffffffffULL
> > >   	   /* Just a ULONG value */
> > >   	   || (sizeof_vals[option_index].is_ulong
> > > -	       && sizeof_vals[option_index].value > ULONG_MAX))
> > > +	       && sizeof_vals[option_index].value > 0x00000000ffffffffULL))
> > What about using MAXDWORD or MAXULONG32 instead?
> 
> Of course :-)
> 
> Christian
> 

Pushed.  I've started deploying a new release.


Thanks!
Corinna