Comment # 17 on bug 1214249 from David Anes

(In reply to Michael Matz from comment #16)
> The patch from SR#1109241 looks fine at a cursory look, it tracks the bytes
> left
> in the destination buffer for the second strlcpy call.  (FWIW, the initial
> patch
> in SR#1104626 was the one that was wrong, but it's now lost in the mist of
> time :) )  So, I think it's all fine now, regarding this bug report here.

Awesome, thanks for such a quick reply. Therefore I'm closing this one a fixed.