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/>.