Hi, * Brendan Cully [06-05-02 15:32:03 -0700] wrote: [...]
You're probably right, it might be better to have check_sec look out for & in the argument to safe_free or FREE.
I've extended to patch and added __FREE_CHECKED__ comments after double-checking the types of the arguments and added some comments in places where it's not too obvious. The patch: <http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~pdmef/mutt/patches/patch-1.5.11-cvs.pdmef.mem.2.diff> also changes all safe_free() to FREE() calls. With it, check_sec.sh doesn't produce false-positives any longer for the memory function calls. bye, Rocco -- :wq!