jzeleny@redhat.com writes:

I guess new version of glibc has some kind of mechanism which is checking boundaries of structures and isn't allowing write out of those boundaries.

Could you test if this works instead? http://folk.uio.no/hbf/ol-struct-hack-1.patch If that doesn't work, similar code elsewhere may be in danger.

Not that it's important in this case since the back-ldif code isn't run often. It just avoids one malloc, one check for whether that succeeded, and one free. Your patch forgot the last two.

Actually the boundary check you mention is exactly the problem the BVL_NAME macro avoids, though I'm not sure why I didn't just use the standard "struct hack". Maybe the problem is with padding bytes after fname. Anyway, I suppose this means the old "struct hack" is now definitely getting dangerous to use.

Whatever is going on, I'd like to find out. Which versions of gcc and glibc, and which architecture is this? (32-bit i683, 64-bit amd, etc). And if it doesn't take much time, could you try if these variants fix the problem too? http://folk.uio.no/hbf/ol-struct-hack-2.patch http://folk.uio.no/hbf/ol-struct-hack-3.patch I don't plan to use them, we can use your variant if my first patch doesn't work. I'm just curious what's going on.