Re: For 1.5.9 - fixed smime-encrypt-self patch
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 05:33:17PM +0900, Tamotsu Takahashi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 09:15:43AM +0100, Christoph Ludwig wrote:
> > b) How do you think gpgme supports encrypt-self?
>
> FYI: https://intevation.de/roundup/aegypten/issue246
> (Aegypten issue tracker: Issue 246: mutt does not do additional encrypt-to)
So it seems I didn't miss a gpgme feature.
> And I want encrypt-self or fcc_clear for both PGP and S/MIME.
> Your patch looks fine!
Thanks.
> But I'm afraid you should use FREE() macro?
Possibly. I saw that in other places safe_malloc() was used. When I looked up
that function I also saw safe_free() so I assumed that to be the function of
choice. If Thomas wants to include the patch I can prepare a version that
calls FREE().
Out of curiosity: What is the point of the FREE() macro? It expands to a
simple call of safe_free() whence it does not offer any added value. And I am
used to a school of programming that avoids macros whenever possible, in
particular macros with common names like FREE that are not prefixed by a
project specific identifier like, e.g., MUTT_FREE.
Regards
Christoph
--
http://www.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de/TI/Mitarbeiter/cludwig.html
LiDIA: http://www.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de/TI/LiDIA/Welcome.html