Hi, * Christoph Ludwig [06-07-06 17:01:38 +0200] wrote:
I am presumptious, I am afraid, but may I ask you to have a look bug report #2195? I take it from your posting that you have a general (or even detailed) idea of the data flow in mutt.
Not really, most of the time. Either there's a light bulb suddenly enlightening my head... or not... :)
As I guess I could solve your problem (or at least found a major one), it was just wrong line numbers and no free() call in mutt_protect() making me dig out a patch you crashing mutt uses...
I tried to have a go at bug #2195 myself, but I failed to understand why there is a double free() only if I send both signed and encrypted messages and where the code needs a patch.
See my response to the bug report which should be around soon. Can you please respond to the report if it's reproduceable with my analysis and if so, if fixing the patch helps? We could then close this bug, I hope.
bye, Rocco -- :wq!