On Wed 13 Aug 2014 23:02:05 William Park wrote:
> What are the alternatives, though?  Everyone criticizes 'strcpy' but
> it's included in glibc.  But, 'strlcpy' is excluded on the ground that
> it's not sufficiently better.  Seems to me, someone has sensitive toes.

err, no, your example makes no sense.  one of these things is in the standards 
documents while the other is not.  get strlcpy into POSIX :P.
-mike