Build: exclude regex when already provided by the system#589
Merged
dnzbk merged 2 commits intonzbgetcom:developfrom Jun 13, 2025
Merged
Build: exclude regex when already provided by the system#589dnzbk merged 2 commits intonzbgetcom:developfrom
dnzbk merged 2 commits intonzbgetcom:developfrom
Conversation
dnzbk
reviewed
Jun 13, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
nzbget includes a quite old version of the glibc regex.
Building and using such old version of regex is unnecessary in most platforms, as the latest and better versions of regex are included in all POSIX distributions for decades.
The old embedded regex is showing various concerning issues:
re_dfa_add_nodefrom there_realloccallscreate_initial_statecalc_firstduplicate_treere_copy_regsfrom there_realloccallsre_search_internalprune_impossible_nodesbuild_trtableallocais discouraged; there is no way to check for failure but failure may still occur, resulting in a possibly exploitable security vulnerabilityHence the best initial action is to avoid using this old code altogether when it's not necessary.