<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: hcache broken (slightly)



On 2006-07-11 20:19:56 +0000, Rocco Rutte wrote:

> One reason could be the way data is stored: it's just a
> memcpy of the HEADER* structure with pointers and such.
> However, when we first fetch a header, it doesn't have the
> full information like pointers set up for sorting etc. Maybe
> that could be the reason?

Sounds like a plausible one, no?

> I ask for other ideas before I try to zero them out in
> hcache.c after fetching a header.

That would be a reasonable thing to do, I think...  Copying
pointers from previous instances of mutt seems dangerous.
-- 
Thomas Roessler · Personal soap box at <http://log.does-not-exist.org/>.