Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> This is just something I noticed in passing. (I did a quick check of all
> the other uses of readlink in the source, and they do get this right.)
There's more random inconsistency than just this. I think we should
standardize on the coding exhibited at, eg, basebackup.c:1023ff, which
positively ensures that it won't scribble on random memory if the
call returns an unexpected value. Will fix.
regards, tom lane