On Monday, 15 May 2006 at 12:14, Rocco Rutte wrote: > 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. Applied, thanks.
Attachment:
pgpcyNqQcfSrw.pgp
Description: PGP signature